From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon May 1 00:01:39 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:01:39 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060430235235.9937.qmail@web61317.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060430235235.9937.qmail@web61317.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <413D7ADA-D762-4947-923D-789E0E02624F@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151691 > > > Joe: > > > The Triwizard Tournament wasn't even a true sporting event(IMO) > but just another form of Competition. > > kchuplis: Interestingly, I saw a bit of Survivor, which I have never seen much of and it occurred to me that it was somewhat reminiscent of the Tri- wizard tournament...... Anyone else see that? The "challenges" that are both physical and psychological I guess led me to that. Like I said, I haven't watched much of it. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 1 00:08:50 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 00:08:50 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151693 > houyhnhnm: > Harry will defeat Voldemort without Dumbledore, but DD may be revealed > to be alive. What purpose would it serve to have DD still be alive? > It would exonerate Snape in a way that could be accepted by all > readers, and while I'm not certain about whether or not Dumbledore is > alive, I am absolutely certain that he was not treacherously murdered > by Snape. Alla: That's the key though, isn't it? The only reason for Dumbledore to be seems to be the exoneration of Snape. My question is what are the other possible plot related reasons for Dumbledore to be alive? What can be achieved through that besides Snape's exoneration? JKR seems to say over and over again that she thinks that Harry has to do his job alone ( with his peers, but not through any significant help of adults). How plot can be moved through DD being alive? Because if we assume for a second that JKR may not be interested in exonerating Snape, does Dumbledore have to be alive still? Do other reasons for DD to be alive actually exist? Thanks, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 1 01:44:47 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 01:44:47 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151694 Annemehr: > > Perhaps the most telling lack of evidence of guards at the gates is > in Ch. 5, during their arrival at Hogwarts for the year (87): a pair of dementors at the front gates is mentioned, setting the scene, but there is no mention of anyone guarding the front doors. > > On the other hand, in the beginning of Ch. 14 (269), after Sirius > Black had gotten into Gryffindor Tower with Neville's stolen > passwords, Professor Flitwick taught the front doors to recognize "a > large picture of Sirius Black." After this, though, there is no > mention of Sirius even trying to enter. > Carol responds: Thanks, Ammemehr. Please note that any annoyance you may detect in this post is not directed at you but at JKR. Let me get this straight. No guards or protective spells of any kind on the front doors, not even after the first attack proved that Black was on the grounds (or could get onto them), and the doors are not even taught to recognize Black until after the *second* attack. So Dumbledore, who didn't want the Dementors at the school in the first place, nevertheless relies on their presence *at the gates* to keep Sirius Black off the grounds and thereby out of the school, even after it's known that he can get past them and must be hiding out on the grounds? No watch on the *doors* at all, even after Black got in the first time, proving that Dementors *at the gates* were no deterrent? No need for Black to use the secret passages on the Marauder's Map at all, since he could walk right into the school at any time (preferably when no one was in the hallways to spot him)? All he needed was his Animagus form to get past the Dementors *at the gates*, which he had already done *months* before, after which he could hide out in the Shrieking Shack (as we know he did and Lupin must have guessed that he did), choose his time, and then just walk up to the doors in human form (till Flitwick taught the doors to recognize him after the *second* attack) and enter the school completely undetected and undeterred? No one, not even Mrs. Norris, was watching the doors? Was the fact that Snape and DD didn't know that SB was an Animagus sufficient reason for them to be astounded that he could get into a castle that *wasn't even locked*? And they both considered unlocked, unguarded front doors (not so much as a Sneakoscope to watch them) and a password-protected common room sufficient protection, not only for Harry but for all the students, even after the attack on the Fat Lady proved that Black could get inside? And Sir Cadogan, who apparently doesn't even know what Black looks like, is considered sufficient protection for the common room after the Fat Lady's painting is slashed, with no additional protection for the school itself? If that's really the case, it's a wonder that Black even waited for Halloween the first time around. If the doors were unlocked day and night despite the threat of a "murderous, raving lunatic" (to quote movie!Ron), he could have just walked right in at any time, preferably after lights out. I've always blamed Lupin for not telling DD about the Marauder's Map because I assumed that the secret passages were important, that Black must have used them to get in. But you seem to be saying that his only important secret was that Black was an Animagus, and that was all DD needed to know to protect the school against Black. (That and the fact that he knew about the Shrieking Shack and was probably hiding out there, as Lupin ought to have told DD and IIRC never did.) But being an Animagus explains only how he could get onto the grounds despite the Dementors. It doesn't explain how he could get into the school itself, unless, as you say, the doors were unguarded and unlocked, which makes no sense given the two attacks on Gryffindor tower, and makes the existence of the secret passages completely irrelevant (except as a way for *Harry* to get to Hogsmeade). Sorry. I don't like it. It makes no sense to me that Black could have gotten into Hogwarts so easily, at any time, just by virtue of his Animagus form. If that were the case, why did he wait two whole months (until the Halloween banquet) when he could have sneaked in any *night* of the year? And DD knew he was already on the grounds, or could easily get there again. Why, then, not put some sort of spell on the front doors or teach them to recognize Black after the *first* incident? Of course, both DD and Snape speak in later books about protective spells placed on the castle, but they play no role that I can see in PoA and they clearly didn't keep Sirius Black out of the castle. Isn't anyone besides me bothered that Dumbledore took so few precautions, especially after the Fat Lady incident, and that the secret passages seem to have played no role at all in Black's getting into the school? Nothing but Dementors at the gates and a warning to the students to watch out for them? Just unguarded, unprotected front doors and the usual password to get into the common room. So, yes, I do think this is a big deal. At first I was only wondering how Black got into Hogwarts and why everyone else seemed to find his Animagus form sufficient explanation for his getting into the castle itself (as opposed to the grounds, which it does explain). Now I find his getting inside disturbingly easy (walking right through the front doors?!) and Dumbledore remiss in his duty to protect not only Harry but every student in Hogwarts. (I do still think that Lupin should have turned in the Marauder's Map to Dumbledore, but it seems less relevant now.) Yes, I know that Sirius Black wasn't really a would-be murderer, at least not of children, but what if he *had* been? Will someone please convince me that it wasn't this easy, that he had to use one of the passages, so I can go back to wondering how he managed to do that undetected? Carol, wondering if we have a precedent here for DD's presumption that the protections in HBP were adequate and not at all happy with this new incompetent!Dumbledore From wdcaroline at yahoo.ca Mon May 1 00:14:07 2006 From: wdcaroline at yahoo.ca (Wade Caroline) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 20:14:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: HP sportsmanship Message-ID: <20060501001407.55492.qmail@web61222.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151696 In reading the orginal post, I was reminded of Frodo in Lord of the Rings, He was RIPPED OFF! After all he went through (please indulge me in the use of the vernacular), where was the bling? Where were the chicks? In the case of HP, he does what I'm sure we all feel was the right thing, and what (really) is the payoff? Precious little, No? wc From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon May 1 02:51:59 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 02:51:59 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151697 houyhnhnm: *(even huger snip)* > > What purpose would it serve to have DD still be alive? It would exonerate Snape in a way that could be accepted by all readers, and while I'm not certain about whether or not Dumbledore is alive, I am absolutely certain that he was not treacherously murdered by Snape. Alla: > That's the key though, isn't it? The only reason for Dumbledore to be seems to be the exoneration of Snape. My question is what are the other possible plot related reasons for Dumbledore to be alive? Ceridwen: I'm not pushing anything on this. Though I'm not as sure as I used to be that Dumbledore is dead, I'm not sure that he's alive, either. It seems like a nice exercise, though. When Gandalf came back, he worked with the peripheral characters while Frodo and Sam continued across Mordor on the main quest, beliving Gandalf to be dead. I think something similar would happen with Dumbledore. *IF* Snape was set up to get closer to LV through killing Dumbledore, then there would have to be some reason for the Order members to accept intelligence from him. We've all wondered about how that would happen. Some speculation centered around changing Patroni (pl?) based on the changes in Tonks's Patronus. Order members would know Snape's Patronus, and Dumbledore's. If Snape's changed into a facsimile of Dumbledore's, then there's the proof of loyalty. Other speculation centered around a message being left, either with an Order member who was not present in the hospital scene, or via a memory or two for the Pensieve. But the clincher for every Order member, once they checked DD's jam preference, would be DD himself standing alive and well in front of them and vouching for Snape's loyalty. Because Snape's loyalty isn't just a thing to itself, as in keeping him out of Azkaban or from taking on the Judas role in the WW for eternity; it has to do with real-time information being gathered from the enemy camp. If Dumbleodre was *not* betrayed, then Snape's information would be accepted, and the cause enhanced. Another Gandalfian role would be to marshall the Order to troubleshoot for Harry & Co as they search for the Horcrux. There must be some other front the Order could fight on, as the Men of Gondor stood outside the gates of Mordor, drawing Sauron's attention and his resources. If Dumbledore has some manageable plan (despite his not being a military leader, in my opinion), then he's kept it close to his chest, especially if getting Snape in deeper with the enemy is a part of it. His being 'dead' in Voldemort's mind would give him the freedom to manage things in the background at a time when LV thinks he has the upper hand. And, some speculation for an Alive!Dumbledore mentions Dumbledore helping to hunt for Horcruxes, though I think that's the hero's task in book 7. And another reason, which we all missed in HBP, is Dumbledore summing everything up for Harry and for us. Also, his approval validating Harry's efforts and results. But these are just emotional. Anyway, just some possibilities for reasons JKR might consider bring Dumbledore back. Ceridwen. From richter at ridgenet.net Mon May 1 02:57:30 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 02:57:30 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151698 Carol: he could hide out in the > Shrieking Shack (as we know he did and Lupin must have guessed that he did), choose his time, and then just walk up to the doors in human form (till Flitwick taught the doors to recognize him after the *second* attack) and enter the school completely undetected and undeterred? No one, not even Mrs. Norris, was watching the doors? I've always blamed Lupin for not telling DD about the Marauder's Map because I assumed that the secret passages were important, that Black must have used them to get in. But you seem to be saying that his only important secret was that Black was an Animagus, and that was all DD needed to know to protect the school against Black. (That and the fact that he knew about the Shrieking Shack and was probably hiding out there, as Lupin ought to have told DD and IIRC never did.) But being > an Animagus explains only how he could get onto the grounds despite > the Dementors. It doesn't explain how he could get into the school > itself, unless, as you say, the doors were unguarded and unlocked, > which makes no sense given the two attacks on Gryffindor tower, and > makes the existence of the secret passages completely irrelevant > (except as a way for *Harry* to get to Hogsmeade). > PAR: Actually DD knew about the shrieking shack AND the passage as HE was the one who had it put in for Lupin when Lupin was a student. And he had to know that Sirius was familiar with it as he knew about the Prank. So Lupin really can't be held accountable for failing to notify DD about the possibility of Sirius using the shack (which does not show up on the map, after all) -- DD knew just as much about that shack as Lupin did. Carol: It makes no sense to me that Black could have gotten into Hogwarts so easily, at any time, just by virtue of his Animagus form. If that were the case, why did he wait two whole months > (until the Halloween banquet) when he could have sneaked in any > *night* of the year? And DD knew he was already on the grounds, or > could easily get there again. Why, then, not put some sort of spell on > the front doors or teach them to recognize Black after the *first* > incident? Of course, both DD and Snape speak in later books about > protective spells placed on the castle, but they play no role that I can see in PoA and they clearly didn't keep Sirius Black out of the > castle. PAR: it makes no sense to me that DD wouldn't know that Quirrel was possessed or that Fake!Moody was NOT Moody or any of a number of other issues. Red Hen suggests that DD is simply unable to take action until the 11th hour. The only other possibility is Puppetmaster!DD in which case he wanted Sirius to be able to gain access to Hogwarts for some reason. PAR. From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon May 1 03:02:22 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 20:02:22 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151699 Ceridwen: I'm not pushing anything on this. Though I'm not as sure as I used to be that Dumbledore is dead, I'm not sure that he's alive, either. It seems like a nice exercise, though. And another reason, which we all missed in HBP, is Dumbledore summing everything up for Harry and for us. Also, his approval validating Harry's efforts and results. But these are just emotional. Ceridwen. Sherry now: Personally, if JKR brings anyone back, I'd rather it was Sirius. Dumbledore has served his role. Harry would be better off with someone like Sirius, his parents' friend, his godfather. He doesn't, or won't need, a wise old mentor. It isn't like Gandalf really, because the other characters in LOTR were not really peripheral characters. They were extremely important characters, with important roles to fill and battles to fight. There are chapters upon chapters of their adventures. And we saw all that action. If Dumbledore was alive, he'd be doing all his work off screen, because of Harry's POV. Also, the hobbits, particularly Frodo and Sam did not really need Gandalf, so his reunion with them was warm and fuzzy, but not particularly vital to the story. I just think Dumbledore has served his purpose to the story. Sherry From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon May 1 03:02:10 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 03:02:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151700 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "richter_kuymal" wrote: Dumbledore HAS done what is "easy" for him. An individual, even a child, is entitled to make INFORMED consent. Not partially informed consent. It is reasonable to put things in a way that a child UNDERSTANDS by simple explanations. It is NOT reasonable to withhold things. Snapes' business IS Harrys' business to the degree it affects HARRY. And Snape being the informant did. DD took the "easy" way out -- rather than risk LV finding out from HP he didn't tell HP things. And that lack of information has time and again caused problems. If the series of tests in the getting of the stone is a trap in SS/PS, then TELLING HP that would have been useful. Not just the adults can take care of it. (and if it was a test for HP, that's equally bad). And yes, when Harry asked that first time, that was when it would have been right to tell Harry. Tonks: I disagree that a child can make an "informed decision" about things that a child does not understand. Some things have been kept from Harry and rightly so. I do not think that DD has ever made a mistake. Ever! Harry is a child in most of these books. He may be the "chosen one", but throughout most of the books, he is still a child without a great deal of experience or wisdom. I would not want to stake the welfare of the whole WW on an impetuous child! Children are told what they need to know for their stage of life. Beyond that it is the adult's responsibility to protect and guide the child. When he was younger Harry had no right to know anything that the adults were doing. The adults WILL take care of it. That is why children have parents and are not just hatched under a rock and on their own from day one. Time and time again we have seen how wrong Harry has been about one thing after another. And it was not his lack of knowing the whole truth that was the problem, "Harry" was the problem. He jumps to erroneous conclusions, doesn't listen to others who are wiser, etc. God, to thing that the whole WW and Muggle world is dependent on Harry scares the hell out of me! He can't even tell the good guys from the bad. He falls into every trap that LV has set for him, even when he is told. I swear, I know people love him, but to me he is an idiot most of the time. A sweet kid, yes but HE is going to save the world? God help us. I have more faith in Neville. Tonks_op DD's most loyal and faithful forever. (But knowingly playing the devil's advocate this time. ;-) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 1 03:03:48 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 03:03:48 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151701 > Ceridwen: > I'm not pushing anything on this. Though I'm not as sure as I used > to be that Dumbledore is dead, I'm not sure that he's alive, either. > It seems like a nice exercise, though. Alla: Hehe. You not pushing anything is only one reason why I love your posts so much :) So, even though I am not buying Dumbledore being alive, I am ready to listen to you almost always. :) Ceridwen: > Another Gandalfian role would be to marshall the Order to > troubleshoot for Harry & Co as they search for the Horcrux. There > must be some other front the Order could fight on, as the Men of > Gondor stood outside the gates of Mordor, drawing Sauron's attention > and his resources. If Dumbledore has some manageable plan (despite > his not being a military leader, in my opinion), then he's kept it > close to his chest, especially if getting Snape in deeper with the > enemy is a part of it. His being 'dead' in Voldemort's mind would > give him the freedom to manage things in the background at a time > when LV thinks he has the upper hand. Alla: Right, I am snipping all the reasons for Dumbledore vouching for Snape loyalty and only replying to this one since this is the one I can see ( IF I could buy DD being alive that is :)). The problem I see with this one though is that we did not hear much about Order operations in HBP. Of course it does not mean that it did not happen, but IMO the Order became basically irrelevant now, since basically everything depends on Harry hunting down Horcruxes and Harry refused to even let Mcgonagall know what he was doing. Do you know what I am saying? I am just not sure that anybody but Harry's friends will be of much of the importance in book 7. Ceridwen: And, some speculation for an > Alive!Dumbledore mentions Dumbledore helping to hunt for Horcruxes, > though I think that's the hero's task in book 7. Alla: Yes, I think so too. Ceridwen: > And another reason, which we all missed in HBP, is Dumbledore summing > everything up for Harry and for us. Also, his approval validating > Harry's efforts and results. But these are just emotional. > > Anyway, just some possibilities for reasons JKR might consider bring > Dumbledore back. Alla: Sure, I would love to see that, but I just don't think that JKR is a liar, you know :) And Dumbledore making appearance would not make her a liar IMO since she said pretty much that DD is dead ( wise one always dies, etc - paraphrase) Alla, who does not think that Dumbledore is alive, but who wholeheartedly admits her hypocricy on this topic and would not mind Sirius being alive at all, although don't think that he is either. :)) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 1 03:21:27 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 03:21:27 -0000 Subject: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151702 > Tonks: When he was younger Harry had no right to know anything > that the adults were doing. The adults WILL take care of it. Alla: Sure adults did take care of things around Harry and fine job they did. Hmmm, in part thanks to Snape Harry has no parents, in part thanks to Dumbledore Harry does not have around the man who loved him as a parent. I suppose Harry should thank them wholeheartedly. :) Tonks: I swear, I know people love him, but to me he is > an idiot most of the time. A sweet kid, yes but HE is going to > save the world? God help us. I have more faith in Neville. Alla: No worries, JKR is just pretending that Harry is going to save the world. At the end this role will belong to Snape and Snape only. :) > Tonks_op > DD's most loyal and faithful forever. > (But knowingly playing the devil's advocate this time. ;-) > Alla: From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon May 1 03:27:22 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 20:27:22 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151703 Tonks: I disagree that a child can make an "informed decision" about things that a child does not understand. Some things have been kept from Harry and rightly so. I do not think that DD has ever made a mistake. Ever! Sherry now: Then Dumbledore himself is a liar, because he says he has made mistakes and that his mistakes are bigger than the average person's. JKR has said so too. So, perhaps he's never made a mistake, but he sure has told some damn big lies then. Tonks When he was younger Harry had no right to know anything that the adults were doing. The adults WILL take care of it. Sherry: True. In the real world. But not in a hero fantasy, in which the immature horrible boy is going to save the world. In such a case, he is entitled to know every single thing he can to do his task. Dumbledore put him at risk by not telling him everything, at least at the end of GOF, if not before. The prophecy should have been revealed to him at that time and not been saved for such a wonderful moment as right after Harry has seen his godfather die. Tonks Time and time again we have seen how wrong Harry has been about one thing after another. And it was not his lack of knowing the whole truth that was the problem, "Harry" was the problem. He jumps to erroneous conclusions, doesn't listen to others who are wiser, etc. God, to thing that the whole WW and Muggle world is dependent on Harry scares the hell out of me! He can't even tell the good guys from the bad. He falls into every trap that LV has set for him, even when he is told. I swear, I know people love him, but to me he is an idiot most of the time. A sweet kid, yes. but HE is going to save the world? God help us. I have more faith in Neville. Sherry now: I don't think we can single out Harry alone for not being able to tell the good guys from the bad. He's in some darn fine company on that one. Who else couldn't tell the good guys from the bad? The sainted Dumbledore let an innocent man rot in a terrible prison for 12 years, never tried to find out the truth, never lifted a finger. Dumbledore couldn't tell an impostor from a old and dear friend in GOF. Dumbledore hired an incompetent like Lockhart. And worst of all, Dumbledore avoided Harry for all of OOTP, thereby causing Harry to feel he had nowhere to turn, noone to trust. No, I've never blamed Dumbledore for the death of Sirius, but I could start doing so if I thought about it long enough. Dumbledore has been neither all perfect, all wise, all knowing or anything else like it. He is flawed, as are all the HP characters. except of course, the ever perfect Lily, and I'm hoping like hell we find out about a flaw or two in her too. That is part of why I can like Dumbledore so much. I don't like perfect characters, because they are not realistic and I can't relate to them. And of course, the biggest mistake of all, Dumbledore trusted Snape, and now Dumbledore is dead, murdered at the hand of that one he trusted and defended so fiercely. But no, of course, he never makes any mistakes, and Harry is just a kid. The thing is that JKR has written a story about kids, and Harry is the one who is going to win in the end. not Dumbledore and not Snape. Sherry Defending the impetuous incompetent boy, because Harry is who I love best in the series. From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Mon May 1 05:25:05 2006 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 01:25:05 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Breaking the Priori Incantatum? References: Message-ID: <44559BB1.000004.03152@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 151704 -------Original Message------- From: gelite67 Any theories on how Harry/LV are going to overcome the Priori Incantatum effect? Some possibilities: 1) LV forces Ollivander or another wandmaker to make him a different wand. 2) The Order has Ollivander, who has made Harry a different wand. 3) Either Harry or LV or both, use another wizard's wand, whether deliberately or out of desperation. (I like the idea of Harry using his mother's wand, in particular.) 4) There is, yet revealed to us, a way for LV and Harry to each use his own present wand and still overcome the PI effect Perhaps the trio's wands working in conjunction???? I love this idea -- the love of his friends helping Harry to overcome and yes, I do think it is consistent with the Prophesy). Another idea: The PI effect does not need to be overcome, and in fact, is essential to Harry defeating LV. Any other ideas? Donna comments: We first see Prior Incantato used in GOF, Chap 9, pgs. 135-136, US Hard cover, by Mr. Diggory placing the tip of his wand against the tip of Harry's wand to see if Harry's wand was the one used to cast the dark mark at the Quidditch World Cup match. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From spirittalks at gmail.com Mon May 1 06:25:43 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 02:25:43 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Breaking the Priori Incantatum? References: <44559BB1.000004.03152@D33LDD51> Message-ID: <015801c66ce8$13b4b420$6401a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 151705 From: gelite67 4) There is, yet revealed to us, a way for LV and Harry to each use his own present wand and still overcome the PI effect Perhaps the trio's wands working in conjunction???? I love this idea -- the love of his friends helping Harry to overcome and yes, I do think it is consistent with the Prophesy). Kim's thought: I don't know how much, if any, consultation JKR has on the HP games but in the several PC and Nintendo games that we have, the trio do have to perform some of the spells in tandem. Has anyone ever noticed the games containing hints for the books? Kim From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon May 1 09:33:37 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 09:33:37 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <011d01c66cb2$02021ff0$2992400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151707 > Magpie: > Throughout the tournament everybody's cheating like it's going out of style > (that is, mostly the adults are bringing the cheat to the players; none of > them are overtly trying to cheat that we can see). a_svirn: That's why I didn't particularly like GoF except for the brilliant cliff-hanger in the end. I felt baffled about the whole tournament business, and indeed still do. Starting with these *unbreakable magical contracts* (surely it wasn't necessary? Except for Rowling to use it as a plot device) every detail is designed in a way that it is impossible *not* to cheat. Out of five referees three are British, so there is a definite pro-British bias. Also each headmaster predictably supports his or her champion. Was it really so difficult to assemble a less partial jury? Hardly more difficult than bring dragons along. Another thing is that some (if not all) members of Hogwarts faculty seemed to know every detail about the tasks whereas their rivals were in the dark all the way. And again there were only one adult per school, whereas the British had the whole faculty to support them. Now, how fair is that? It was also inconceivable that champions wouldn't avail themselves on the advice of their friends and school-mates with that egg. Perhaps this sort of teamwork was exactly what was required, but then again, Hogwarts champions had an undeniable advantage ? a much bigger "team". And I agree that there is nothing sportsmanlike about awarding points for "moral fiber". In fact, it's downright ridiculous. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon May 1 10:38:47 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 10:38:47 -0000 Subject: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151708 Tonks: > I disagree that a child can make an "informed decision" about things that a child does not understand. Some things have been kept from Harry and rightly so. Ceridwen: I have to agree with Tonks on this. JKR has said something about setting the genres on their ears, and actually showing that the hero has some growing up to do would, at least in the TV shows I've seen, be setting that particular genre on its ear. I'm fuzzier about classical storylines, but I very vaguely recall that heroes were stupid and bull-headed until they were out on their own and had to make decisions without the buffer of their elders to protect them. Tonks: > Children are told what they need to know for their stage of life. Beyond that it is the adult's responsibility to protect and guide the child. When he was younger Harry had no right to know anything that the adults were doing. The adults WILL take care of it. That is why children have parents and are not just hatched under a rock and on their own from day one. Ceridwen: Since the quoted post was a response to me, it's obvious that I believe this. Harry, or any child in this position, already had enough to do with learning his lessons, which will be important to his task, without worrying about what the adults are up to. Dumbledore had some reason that he thought was good enough, so he trusted Snape. Harry starts the series at eleven, and very importantly, as a baby in the WW. He needs to be protected from having to worry about every little thing as he learns his way around what is, to him, an alien society. He has little experience with adults, or with life in general. And the experience he has is very negative - the Dursleys, and the teachers at his primary school who didn't notice that something fishy was going on in his life. And, children are very black-and-white about the rules. A bad guy is always bad, a good guy is always good. That's why Sirius told him that people weren't divided neatly into two camps. A lot of people want JKR to write believably for the Real World, in things like comeuppance for characters they see as abusive. If she will, then why not write realistically for children who are still too young to see beyond what their limited experience shows them? Kids in real life are brutalized and killed by 'nice' people. What if this is a lesson of the books? Look at the 'nice' Crouch!Moody, and the fawning Peter Pettigrew. Or, the 'dangerously demented' Sirius Black. Or the 'all-knowing' Dumbledore. The jury's still out on 'greasy' Snape. Tonks: > He jumps to erroneous conclusions, doesn't listen to others who are wiser, etc. Ceridwen: Yes, he does. That's all a part of growing up, and if he learns from his mistakes, he'll be better able to defeat Voldemort when the time comes. These years are when a child learns discernment as a survival skill as well as a social aid. I think Harry will get his worst time in this regard during the first half of book 7. And that's when it'll start to hit home and he'll absorb the lessons. I believe that Harry will win, and there was no reason to worry (though it does look like it at times *g*). Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon May 1 11:02:00 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 11:02:00 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151709 Alla: *(snip)* > The problem I see with this one though is that we did not hear much about Order operations in HBP. Of course it does not mean that it did not happen, but IMO the Order became basically irrelevant now, since basically everything depends on Harry hunting down Horcruxes and Harry refused to even let Mcgonagall know what he was doing. Do you know what I am saying? I am just not sure that anybody but Harry's friends will be of much of the importance in book 7. Ceridwen: If we take LOTR as a template (both as a model and as different), then of course Harry, Ron and Hermione will be the central focus of the book. It's from Harry's POV, and it doesn't jump around to the different stories. Harry didn't see the Order doing anything in HBP, but it may have. Dumbledore said they had moved to a new headquarters, so they must be doing something. Harry is out of the loop. I think the Order is doing *something*, though you're right, we won't see it until after it's over. Alla: > Sure, I would love to see that, but I just don't think that JKR is a liar, you know :) And Dumbledore making appearance would not make her a liar IMO since she said pretty much that DD is dead ( wise one always dies, etc - paraphrase) Ceridwen: I really try to avoid interviews, since I'd rather just read the books. But it's hard not to sneak peeks, you know? *g* She also said that the dead don't come back to life in her stories. But if Dumbledore didn't really die, then that isn't going back on anything she said. And, yes, mentors die, leaving the road free for the hero. But, sometimes they do come back (like Gandalf). The road is still free for Harry, as it was for Frodo. The absence of the mentor is the key, I think, not necessarily his actual death. But the hero has to believe he's gone, or he'll spend his time searching for the wise advice instead of carrying on... Does this sound anything like the Mirror of Erised? It just suddenly did to me. Ceridwen. From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon May 1 12:21:01 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 12:21:01 -0000 Subject: Order HQ Was:Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151710 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > Ceridwen: > Harry didn't see the Order doing anything in HBP, > but it may have. Dumbledore said they had moved to a new > headquarters, so they must be doing something. Annemehr: At the Dursleys', when DD was telling Harry about Sirius's will and wondering whether there was some enchantment to force 12 GP to go to a pureblood, he said "Naturally we had to move out until such time as we have clarified the position." Then the position was indeed clarified when Harry gave Kreacher orders, so I imagine the Order moved right back in after a mere two-week absence. Did I miss anything else in the book that suggests the Order had actually moved out permanently after all? Annemehr From richter at ridgenet.net Mon May 1 13:07:15 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 13:07:15 -0000 Subject: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151711 Tonks: > > I disagree that a child can make an "informed decision" about > things > that a child does not understand. Some things have been kept from > Harry and rightly so. > > Ceridwen: > I have to agree with Tonks on this. JKR has said something about > setting the genres on their ears, and actually showing that the hero has some growing up to do would, at least in the TV shows I've seen, > be setting that particular genre on its ear. I'm fuzzier about > classical storylines, but I very vaguely recall that heroes were > stupid and bull-headed until they were out on their own and had to > make decisions without the buffer of their elders to protect them. > > Tonks: > > Children are told what they need to know for their stage of life. PAR: in real life, children have to be told about sexual predators. About avoiding drugs. In some countries, they had better be well knowledgeable about land mines and the fact that bad people might kidnap them and force them to become child soldiers. I don't know very many children who haven't watched the news which presents facts of life in explicit detail. News about wars, terrorists, gangs. If you are putting a child in harm's way, then you aren't treating him as a child. If you put an individual in harm's way, you have the obligation to provide that person as much knowledge and help as you can. And sorry, I don't find that DD has done that. PAR From kchuplis at alltel.net Mon May 1 13:30:02 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 08:30:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Order HQ Was:Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) References: Message-ID: <001b01c66d23$599fb6c0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 151712 ----- Original Message ----- From: annemehr To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 7:21 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Order HQ Was:Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > Ceridwen: > Harry didn't see the Order doing anything in HBP, > but it may have. Dumbledore said they had moved to a new > headquarters, so they must be doing something. Annemehr: At the Dursleys', when DD was telling Harry about Sirius's will and wondering whether there was some enchantment to force 12 GP to go to a pureblood, he said "Naturally we had to move out until such time as we have clarified the position." Then the position was indeed clarified when Harry gave Kreacher orders, so I imagine the Order moved right back in after a mere two-week absence. Did I miss anything else in the book that suggests the Order had actually moved out permanently after all? kchuplis: I got that impression too, but what with Snape, who was in and out of there regularly, appearing to be "on the dark side" ;) it will remain impractable for the Order to return, don't you think? I wonder where they went to however. I, like others, wonder how much the Order will be involved next book. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 1 13:26:31 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 13:26:31 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151713 > Carol responds: > Let me get this straight. No guards or protective spells of any kind > on the front doors, not even after the first attack proved that Black > was on the grounds (or could get onto them), and the doors are not > even taught to recognize Black until after the *second* attack. Potioncat: First, here's a link to JKR's map of Hogwarts. My monitor screen is so dark, I can't make out the images. So I've no idea if this will support my ideas or not. If anyone uses it to reply to this post, could you describe the picture? :-) http://www.hp-lexicon.org/atlas/hogwarts/atlas-h-jkrmap.html I have the basic idea that Hogwarts the castle (keep) is surrounded by a wall on at least three sides and the Forbidden Forest on another. Although I'm not sure if the forest is on the other side of the wall. So, unless you can get over the wall, under the wall or through the gates, you could not get to the front doors of the castle proper. Hagrid has to pass through the gates to go to Hogsmeade, because he talks about having to pass the Dementors. In a sense, it's like saying you don't have to lock your bedroom door because the front door is locked. Of course, I'm never quite sure if the castle grounds are only those inside the surrounding walls or if there are "grounds" outside the walls. Carol: It doesn't explain how he could get into the school > itself, unless, as you say, the doors were unguarded and unlocked, > which makes no sense given the two attacks on Gryffindor tower, and > makes the existence of the secret passages completely irrelevant > (except as a way for *Harry* to get to Hogsmeade). Potioncat: We certainly weren't told "how" he did it. But I think he must have come into the castle as a dog. We aren't told anyone has a dog familiar, but we know there are more than the three animals mentioned in the first letter. As for the secret passages, they have played a serious lack of importance, haven't they? You'd think Pettigrew would have told LV about them. But, along that line: In HBP why were Order members patrolling the halls at all? Did DD suspect Draco was trying to get DEs into the castle? >Carol: > Isn't anyone besides me bothered that Dumbledore took so few > precautions, especially after the Fat Lady incident, and that the > secret passages seem to have played no role at all in Black's getting > into the school? Potioncat: I'm not convinced that DD thought Black was really a danger. He certainly seemed to "come around" to his story pretty quickly if you ask me. And I'll have to go back and read DD's comment about not knowing the Marauders were animagi. Was there any fudge room in that statement? From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 1 14:06:03 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 14:06:03 -0000 Subject: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151714 > Tonks: > > Children are told what they need to know for their stage of life. > Beyond that it is the adult's responsibility to protect and guide > the child. When he was younger Harry had no right to know anything > that the adults were doing. The adults WILL take care of it. That > is why children have parents and are not just hatched under a rock > and on their own from day one. > > Ceridwen: > Since the quoted post was a response to me, it's obvious that I > believe this. Harry, or any child in this position, already had > enough to do with learning his lessons, which will be important to > his task, without worrying about what the adults are up to. > Dumbledore had some reason that he thought was good enough, so he > trusted Snape. Harry starts the series at eleven, and very > importantly, as a baby in the WW. He needs to be protected from > having to worry about every little thing as he learns his way around > what is, to him, an alien society. He has little experience with > adults, or with life in general. And the experience he has is very > negative - the Dursleys, and the teachers at his primary school who > didn't notice that something fishy was going on in his life. And, > children are very black-and-white about the rules. A bad guy is > always bad, a good guy is always good. That's why Sirius told him > that people weren't divided neatly into two camps. Magpie: But I would say that the fifth book is where this truly breaks down, as part of the text. Dumbledore's "protection" of Harry in OotP is a problem, and in the end I think it's even revealed that he's crossed the line from responsible parenting to coddling for his own reasons. He didn't have to tell Harry about the prophecy to make things better. He could have just made sure that someone sat him down and explained what Voldemort was doing. Granted it should have been obvious even to Harry, but it wasn't, and since he doesn't trust Snape he was pre-disposed to wonder whether Occlumency was in his best interest. Harry's own poor thinking in this case was reason to explain more to him, not less, because the older he gets the harder he is to control. He's begun to expect to be treated more like an adult so DD can't just withdraw from him. In general I see no reason in the fifth book why Harry couldn't have been told about the Prophecy earlier. Since the books are about growing up the moment was always going to come where Harry *was* told what he needed to know. About half of OotP was Harry demanding to be treated as an adult without really understanding what that meant and so seeming childish, which is probably why a lot of people saw Harry as taking a step back in OotP, becoming immature where he had once been so mature for his age. Really I think he was going through that necessary adolescent phase that just always sounds like that--much as Draco does with Snape in HBP (both boys looked at from another angle also seem older.) But along with Harry's adolescent demands I think we also very much saw the adults making bad descisions about not telling him things because they wanted to protect him in ways for which he was too old. He'd gotten to where he had to share in the responsibility and the people who are the most protective of him are doing so for their own reasons--Molly mothers, Dumbledore sentimentally wants to make him "happy." Sirius sometimes went too far in the other direction (wanting him to be more like James and so take unnecessary risks) but I think he's still correct about his instincts to tell Harry the truth. Maybe it's because Sirius sometimes seems stuck in adolescence, maybe not, but I think his instincts there were right. Then there's also the fact that Dumbledore doesn't just keep children out of the loop, he keeps adults out too. Not that he should tell them everything--I agree with the post saying that in a military operation it's good not to let people know more than they need to know. But Dumbledore goes beyond that in the tradition of the Wise Old Man in fantasy. People are expected to trust his whims and gut feelings without explanation. No one in the Order has a good idea why they're trusting ex-Death Eater Snape so they can't judge him themselves, which puts them in the same childish position as Harry at times. I've started re-reading HBP and in their first trip to Diagon Alley we hear the Ministry wanted to give Harry a normal security force but "Dumbledore thought" Hagrid would do fine-- and Hagrid then goes on to prove completely inadequate. Nothing terribly bad happens, but it's still kind of an interesting incident. -m From phil at pcsgames.net Mon May 1 12:11:52 2006 From: phil at pcsgames.net (Phil Vlasak) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 08:11:52 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) References: Message-ID: <023601c66d2c$b2e616d0$6600a8c0@phil> No: HPFGUIDX 151715 Hi Folks, If Dumbledore wanted to fake his death, then the Headmaster portrait of him could be the real Dumbledore transformed into a portrait as Horace Slughorn pretended to be an armchair. Phil who has not read this theory yet. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon May 1 16:05:55 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 16:05:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151716 Tonks: > > > Children are told what they need to know for their stage of life... *(snip)* Ceridwen: > > Since the quoted post was a response to me, it's obvious that I believe this. *(snip)* Harry starts the series at eleven, and very importantly, as a baby in the WW... Magpie: > But I would say that the fifth book is where this truly breaks down, as part of the text. Dumbledore's "protection" of Harry in OotP is a problem, and in the end I think it's even revealed that he's crossed the line from responsible parenting to coddling for his own reasons... *(snip)* Ceridwen: Yes, I agree. Harry is getting older, he's beginning to find his footing and is comfortable in his new world. I particularly didn't like that Dumbledore didn't or wouldn't see that Harry and Snape wouldn't get along. I know he had other issues, with Umbridge making enough trouble to get him out of his job, but if he couldn't sit Harry down and explain what was going on, then he should have asked McGonagall to do it. She's Harry's Head of House, and he doesn't have issues with her like he has with Snape. Snape would still be the person to teach Occlumency, but definitely not the person to explain why. And here the problem of Dumbledore keeping things from his people rears its ugly head - McGonagall would need to be told too much for her to be able to sit Harry down and tell him. Harry did look like an emotional teenager in HBP, but I thought that was partially explained by his 'channeling' Voldemort's own anger through their connection? It really is hard to tell where the 'rebellious' stage in Harry's development ends, and the constant bile from Voldemort blends into it. So I agree that it must have been hard for the adults around him to view him as getting older, when he was acting immaturely. And now we get into the problem of what is enough, and what would cross that line and become too great a burden for the maturity of the child. The only subject I've ever had to deal with my children in this vein is sex, and even then, it's difficult to say how much they need to know at any given time. The adults did make mistakes, and Dumbledore most of all because he had decades more experience in dealing with children, then came McGonagall, but she was hampered by not knowing everything DD knew. Molly has her own issues, typical mother issues, of not really seeing that the kids are more mature than she thinks. And, the whole thing is muddied up by the connection between Harry and Voldemort, and just how much do we want Voldemort to know? Magpie: > Then there's also the fact that Dumbledore doesn't just keep children out of the loop, he keeps adults out too. Not that he should tell them everything--I agree with the post saying that in a military operation it's good not to let people know more than they need to know. Ceridwen: I wrote a little about compartmentalizing intelligence, so I'm glad you agree! *g* But there should be some continuity, where each Order member has a piece of the puzzle so that the whole can be reconstructed from its parts. Galpalot's Law? If so, then what is the missing piece? Only Dumbledore would have that. But, for the operation to run smoothly, all sections should be worked on by someone. Harry, and therefore we, don't see that. Magpie: > But Dumbledore goes beyond that in the tradition of the Wise Old Man in fantasy. People are expected to trust his whims and gut feelings without explanation. No one in the Order has a good idea why they're trusting ex-Death Eater Snape so they can't judge him themselves, which puts them in the same childish position as Harry at times. Ceridwen: Maybe another case of turing a genre at least sideways? I think this is why I, and I think others, believe that Dumbledore told someone why he trusts Snape, or left some way to explain, like a memory ready for the Pensieve. As an intelligence leader, each part of the puzzle has to be in someone's hands so they can be reassembled if necessary. Why not this piece? (Is this the Galpalot piece?) It's also another reason why I don't see Dumbledore as a major military leader - he keeps too much from people. Though, I only know what Harry's POV tells me. I might be wrong. Magpie: > I've started re-reading HBP and in their first trip to Diagon Alley we hear the Ministry wanted to give Harry a normal security force but "Dumbledore thought" Hagrid would do fine-- and Hagrid then goes on to prove completely inadequate. Nothing terribly bad happens, but it's still kind of an interesting incident. Ceridwen: I've seen the Ministry as a third party to the conflict, not being on either side, but adversarial to both. Normally, I would see the rebel faction as being the adversary to the government, but the story is told from Harry's POV and he's Dumbledore's man. Maybe the adversary role of the Ministry is why Dumbledore wanted his own person there instead? And, speaking of Harry as Dumbledore's *man*, Dumbledore did treat him more like an adult in HBP, I think. He didn't cut Harry slack, and was short with him a few times. He's expecting more thought from Harry now that he's gotten over his desire to coddle. I don't think Harry fully rose to the occasion, keeping the secret of the Horcruxes from McGonagall as he did. Yes, I know Dumbledore told him not to tell, but that was before Dumbledore's death, which changed things. Whoever becomes the leader of the Order will need to know all of the information, as well as what DD had planned. Whoever this is, Harry will need to inform that person of his mission - and I don't think it will be Harry. He's got a specific task to do, and can't be bothered managing everything else. But, I think that Harry will do a lot of maturing in book 7. It's the only chance he's got in the confines of the books. He'll do his task, things will sink in, he'll discover things and grow. I think book 7 will be very much Harry's book in this way. Sorry about the 'stream of consciousness' going on. My consciousness isn't that coherent. Ceridwen. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 1 17:14:33 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 17:14:33 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151717 --- In HPforGrownups at y > Thanks, Ammemehr. Please note that any annoyance you may detect in > this post is not directed at you but at JKR. > > Let me get this straight. No guards or protective spells of any kind > on the front doors, not even after the first attack proved that Black > was on the grounds (or could get onto them), and the doors are not > even taught to recognize Black until after the *second* attack. > Pippin: "the walls and grounds of Hogwarts are guarded by many ancient spells and charms to ensure the bodily and mental safety of those who dwell within them" -- OOP ch 24 Hagrid, though he is "keeper of the keys" does not open the doors for the first years. He knocks and introduces them to McGonagall before they enter. I think the doors were already enchanted to keep out intruders, but either the door spells didn't work against animals, or they didn't work against Sirius's 'open anything' knife. (He may also have been trying to use the properties of the knife when he slashed the Fat Lady's portrait, not just being wantonly destructive.) I think there is probably not much even Dumbledore could do to improve on those spells, and he was probably wary of trying, since this is ancient magic, little understood, and we know spells can interact with each other in unpredictable ways. There were portraits and ghosts on watch at all times -- why set mortal guards in a Death Eater's path? Presumably Black wouldn't have any more trouble eluding them than the ghosts and portraits, but unlike the ghosts and portraits, they might be killed. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 1 18:04:23 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 18:04:23 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151718 > > Alla: > > That's the key though, isn't it? The only reason for Dumbledore to be > seems to be the exoneration of Snape. My question is what are the > other possible plot related reasons for Dumbledore to be alive? > > What can be achieved through that besides Snape's exoneration? JKR > seems to say over and over again that she thinks that Harry has to do > his job alone ( with his peers, but not through any significant help > of adults). > > How plot can be moved through DD being alive? > > Because if we assume for a second that JKR may not be interested in > exonerating Snape, does Dumbledore have to be alive still? > > Do other reasons for DD to be alive actually exist? Pippin: The old guy with the beard isn't there to move the plot -- he's there to provide content and exposition. He's the one who tells the hero (and the reader) what all the fuss is about, and he embodies the values and the accumulated wisdom of the culture our hero is fighting to save. He has to be removed so that the hero can show that he's learned what the old guy was trying to teach him. He comes back in some form, not necessarily as a living person, to confirm that the difficult choices the hero had to make without his guidance were the right ones, and so the values and wisdom the hero was fighting for have endured. By the author's own admission, there is evidence in the books that Snape may not be evil, so presumably at some point Harry is going to have to confront such evidence too and make a choice. Whatever he decides, the reader will want to know whether Dumbledore would have approved. Pippin From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon May 1 20:40:19 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 20:40:19 -0000 Subject: Breaking the Priori Incantatum?. In-Reply-To: <44559BB1.000004.03152@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151719 gelite67 Wrote: > Any theories on how Harry/LV are going > to overcome the Priori Incantatum effect? Why would Harry want to overcome Priori Incantatum when the last time it saved his life. The stronger will force the weaker to regurgitate old spells rather than do his master's bidding, and 3 years ago Harry proved himself to be stronger than Voldemort, at least stronger in magical arm wrestling like they did in the graveyard in book 4. Voldemort might want to get around Priori Incantatum but not Harry. Eggplant From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon May 1 21:42:54 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 21:42:54 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151720 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > a_svirn: > ...edited... > > And I agree that there is nothing sportsmanlike about awarding > points for "moral fiber". In fact, it's downright ridiculous. > bboyminn: Admittedly, I am ignoring several of your points to make one of my own, but I think many here are missing the point. We can certainly apply the broad and general concept of sportsmanship to the Tri-Wizards Tournement, but I don't think it can be applied specifically. By that I mean this is not a /sporting event/ this is not basketball, football, and rugby; it's Dragons, a deep lake rescue, and a dark and dangerous maze filled with enchantments and creatures. This is not a test of getting a ball into a goal, it is a test of courage, daring, cunning, and resourcefullness; and I might even venture to say priorities. If Harry had not had moral fiber, he would have taken Ron and left the others to rot, and consequently would have been the first one back. But he stayed, determined to make sure all were rescued, and when all were not rescued, he rescued the remaining hostages himself. Even after the first champion turned up, Harry could have said, 'OK, they're coming now, it's OK for me to go', but he didn't. The safety of his friends, of all the hostages, was still a higher priority than winning for the sake of winning. The same when the second champion turned up, Harry could have taken that as a chance to get away. But again, he showed that people were a higher priority than winning, so he stayed until he couldn't stay any longer. I think that very much reflects the very character traits the tournement was designed to test, and he was awarded those extra points for displaying the very characteristics they were looking for. So, I agree with others, this is not a sporting event with very specific rules of play. This is a very dark, dangerous, and most importantly, dynamic tournement, and given all that, beyond the basic concept of the task to acomplish, I don't think there were a lot of hard and fast rules. They complex dynamics of the events allow for a great deal of flexibility in the rules and interpretation of the events. So, in my opinion, the extra points were will within the context of the tournement, and before we start complaining about how unfair it was, let's examine the reactions of Viktor and Cedric. They don't seem too fussed about it. Karkaroff is certainly fussed, but Krum seems to accept the judgement graciously, as does Cedric. Since, in a sense, these tasks are a test of character, Cedric and Viktor seem to recognise that Harry won by virtue of displaying superior character. I think that they were slightly ashamed that they didn't think to rescue all the hostages themselves. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon May 1 22:40:05 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 22:40:05 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151721 > bboyminn: > We can certainly apply the broad and general concept of sportsmanship > to the Tri-Wizards Tournement, but I don't think it can be applied > specifically. By that I mean this is not a /sporting event/ this is > not basketball, football, and rugby; it's Dragons, a deep lake rescue, > and a dark and dangerous maze filled with enchantments and creatures. a_svirn: Here is a broad and general meaning from a dictionary: "sportsmanship 1. conduct considered fitting for a sportsperson, including *observance of the rules of fair play* (emphasis mine ? a_svirn), respect for others, and graciousness in losing". While it can easily be applied for the champions themselves, the jury and the members of the organizing committee don't seem to know the first thing about fair play. > bboyminn: > So, I agree with others, this is not a sporting event with very > specific rules of play. This is a very dark, dangerous, and most > importantly, dynamic tournement, and given all that, beyond the basic > concept of the task to acomplish, I don't think there were a lot of > hard and fast rules. They complex dynamics of the events allow for a > great deal of flexibility in the rules and interpretation of the events. a_svirn: The tournament might have been dangerous and dynamic, but the rules were clear enough. You've got to get a golden egg without damaging real ones. You've got to get your hostage within an hour, or "the prospect's black, //Too late". Does it sound like it allows room for flexibility? > bboyminn: > So, in my opinion, the extra points were will within the context of > the tournement, a_svirn: Well, I can agree with that. Where cheating is traditional, extra points for fiber will certainly be within the context. Why, even extra champion for the hosts was well within the context! > bboyminn: and before we start complaining about how unfair it > was, let's examine the reactions of Viktor and Cedric. They don't seem > too fussed about it. Karkaroff is certainly fussed, but Krum seems to > accept the judgement graciously, as does Cedric. a_svirn: Well, they were as good as told they are lacking in the moral fiber department. Must have been embarrassing. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 1 22:45:07 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 22:45:07 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151722 Carol earlier: > > Let me get this straight. No guards or protective spells of any kind on the front doors, not even after the first attack proved that Black was on the grounds (or could get onto them), and the doors are not even taught to recognize Black until after the *second* attack. > > > Pippin: > "the walls and grounds of Hogwarts are guarded by many ancient > spells and charms to ensure the bodily and mental safety of those > who dwell within them" -- OOP ch 24 I think the doors were already enchanted to keep out intruders, but either the door spells didn't work against animals, or they didn't work against Sirius's 'open anything' knife. (He may also have been trying to use the properties of the knife when he slashed the Fat Lady's portrait, not just being wantonly destructive.) > > I think there is probably not much even Dumbledore could do to improve on those spells, and he was probably wary of trying, since this is ancient magic, little understood, and we know spells can interact with each other in unpredictable ways. > > There were portraits and ghosts on watch at all times -- why set mortal guards in a Death Eater's path? Presumably Black wouldn't have any more trouble eluding them than the ghosts and portraits, but unlike the ghosts and portraits, they might be killed. Carol responds: Yes, I mentioned somewhere in my mostly snipped post that both Sanpe and Dumbledore mention protective spells on Hogwarts even before the extra precautions taken in HBP, but I don't recall any mention of them in PoA, only the Dementors guarding the *gates* as opposed to the doors (which are heavy oak doors that would be hard for a dog to open, but unless DD is lying, he doesn't know at this point that Black is an Animagus). And clearly those spells didn't keep Black out, nor did the ghost/portrait network report him when he climbed the stairs to the tower. And once he had actually gotten into the school, DD knew he was on the grounds. Why not take additional precautions then? At *least* have Mrs. Norris (who can get out of the way of a wizard quite quickly) keep watch on the doors at night. Or a Sneakoscope that would go off if unauthorized people entered? Someone mentioned that DD knew about the Shrieking Shack. Of course he did since he apparently built the passageway from the Whomping Willow (or had it built) for Teen!Lupin's use, but did he know that Black knew how to enter it and might be hiding there? Why not search it, then? And if a dog is found there, why not test to be sure he's not an Animagus? But I can't recall any evidence that the grounds were searched after either attack, only the castle itself. But essentially, then, everyone believes that Black got into the castle using the front doors and not a secret passageway? No one is even mildly annoyed by the pointlessness of the Marauder's Map if it didn't provide a clue to the way Black was entering the castle? And no one besides me finds his ability to just walk through the door strange or disturbing, considering that DD to all appearances (along with Snape and virtually every other adult we encounter in the book, from Fudge to McGonagall) believes that Black is a DE who wants to kill Harry? No one is disturbed that the protection was placed on the doors (teaching them to recognize Black) only after the *second* attack even though protection of the *grounds* as opposed to the school was now useless? And everyone also thinks that it was okay for Lupin to keep the Marauders' Map because he "knew" that Black wasn't getting in that way? (Black's actual state of guilt or innocence isn't relevant here; Lupin thought he was a murderer. If there was a way for Black to get into the castle other than the front doors and Lupin alone knew about it, shouldn't Lupin have revealed that information to DD?) BTW, I don't think there's any evidence that Black owned or used the open-anything knife at the time. The knife he used on Ron's curtains (and presumably on the Fat Lady's portrait) was the twelve-inch blade he intended to use on Wormtail in lieu of a wand and which Ron saw in his hand. Carol, feeling utterly bewildered and alone on this one! From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 1 22:58:29 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 18:58:29 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: Message-ID: <001201c66d72$c3e93de0$736c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151723 > bboyminn: > This is not a test of getting a ball into a goal, it is a test of > courage, daring, cunning, and resourcefullness; and I might even > venture to say priorities. If Harry had not had moral fiber, he would > have taken Ron and left the others to rot, and consequently would have > been the first one back. But he stayed, determined to make sure all > were rescued, and when all were not rescued, he rescued the remaining > hostages himself. > > Even after the first champion turned up, Harry could have said, 'OK, > they're coming now, it's OK for me to go', but he didn't. The safety > of his friends, of all the hostages, was still a higher priority than > winning for the sake of winning. The same when the second champion > turned up, Harry could have taken that as a chance to get away. But > again, he showed that people were a higher priority than winning, so > he stayed until he couldn't stay any longer. I think that very much > reflects the very character traits the tournement was designed to > test, and he was awarded those extra points for displaying the very > characteristics they were looking for. Magpie: No, it is a test of getting a ball through a hoop, only with more dangerous obstacles and needing more resourcefulness. Harry mistakenly thinks the hostages are in danger so forgets the game and just saves them. That shows that Harry is the kind of person who, if he thought people were honestly in danger, would think that was more important than a game. I would imagine Cedric Diggory is another such person, as are Viktor and Fleur, hopefully. I understand the impulse to not penalize Harry when he thought people were in trouble, but also have a big problem with randomly coming up with a "moral fibre" measurement to keep him in the lead. One of the hilarious things about GoF is that we're always encouraged to sympathize with Harry for being the underdog but Rowling just can't bring herself to have him lose at anything. He's still acting like he can't possibly win when he's in first place right out of the gate--the one time he might have gotten points off the judges find a loophole--and override the judge who doesn't. It suddenly reminds me of the Prefects badge--Harry finally has to come in second in something and then nope! He really was the real Prefect! Most kids have to deal with disappointments, and making mistakes for good reasons that they still have to suffer for. > bboyminn: and before we start complaining about how unfair it > was, let's examine the reactions of Viktor and Cedric. They don't seem > too fussed about it. Karkaroff is certainly fussed, but Krum seems to > accept the judgement graciously, as does Cedric. Magpie: Too bad Krum and Cedric don't get extra points for accepting this judgmenton on a whim graciously . Or for accepting Harry's being the tournament graciously. The judges are a lot less free with the sentimental points at the end of the Tournament where Harry wins cause Cedric dies. Harry himself has the impulse to give the winnings to Cedric, but the committee seems to consider death a disqualification. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 1 22:57:30 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 22:57:30 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151724 bboyminn wrote: > > This is not a test of getting a ball into a goal, it is a test of courage, daring, cunning, and resourcefullness; and I might even venture to say priorities. If Harry had not had moral fiber, he would have taken Ron and left the others to rot, and consequently would have been the first one back. But he stayed, determined to make sure all were rescued, and when all were not rescued, he rescued the remaining hostages himself. > So, in my opinion, the extra points were will within the context of the tournement, and before we start complaining about how unfair it was, let's examine the reactions of Viktor and Cedric. They don't seem too fussed about it. Karkaroff is certainly fussed, but Krum seems to accept the judgement graciously, as does Cedric. Since, in a sense, these tasks are a test of character, Cedric and Viktor seem to recognise that Harry won by virtue of displaying superior character. I think that they were slightly ashamed that they didn't think to rescue all the hostages themselves. Carol responds: And don't forget Fleur, who is tearfully grateful to Harry and not only doesn't resent his getting all those points when she came in last, but says when she's awarded 25 points, "I deserved zero." Yes, Harry saved her sister, but he did what *she* was supposed to do and she could have been resentful rather than grateful once she realized that no one was going to let her sister drown. And she retains her gratitude afterwards. The contest was nothing to her; Harry's heroism and her sister's life were everything. Carol, who never cared much for Fleur but was moved to tears by that moment From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon May 1 23:24:14 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 23:24:14 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <001201c66d72$c3e93de0$736c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151725 > > bboyminn: > > > This is not a test of getting a ball into a goal, it is a test of > > courage, daring, cunning, and resourcefullness; and I might even > > venture to say priorities. If Harry had not had moral fiber, he would > > have taken Ron and left the others to rot, and consequently would have > > been the first one back. But he stayed, determined to make sure all > > were rescued, and when all were not rescued, he rescued the remaining > > hostages himself. > > Magpie: > No, it is a test of getting a ball through a hoop, only with more dangerous > obstacles and needing more resourcefulness. a_svirn: And let us not forget that where cunning and resourcefulness are concerned Harry failed spectacularly. He never solved anything by himself; he only made it through the tasks because Crouch made sure that he would. Actually, even his daring in this instance is questionable ? since he was compelled to participate by the unbreakable magical contract. No wonder he didn't want the prize money. It was unfairly gained and *indeed* should have been Cedric's. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 01:08:31 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 01:08:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151726 Ceridwen: > A lot of people want JKR to write believably for the Real World, in > things like comeuppance for characters they see as abusive. If she > will, then why not write realistically for children who are still too > young to see beyond what their limited experience shows them? Alla: Absolutely. I think many of us (myself included) constantly switching "modes" when discussing the characters, if that makes sense. We discuss characters as "types", characters as reflection (partial or full) of RL people personalities, beliefs, etc. The thing is I think SOME things could only be discussed in the "fantasy literature mode". Of course this is just my opinion, and I realize that I start to babble again, but bear with me please. Erm... and of course what I am going to say is just my opinion. It is getting tiresome to repeat it in every sentence, so I will just say it now. Abusive teachers like Snape exist in RL, so it is easy to discuss Snape conduct as reflection of RL if one so desires, and I definitely do. Of course, Snape can also be discussed as "type", as "enforcer" of whatever he enforces, etc. I can switch modes when discussing Snape, even though my preferable one is to discuss him as RL reflection. Children who are going to save the world, do NOT to the best of my knowledge exist in RL :), that is why IMO it is impossible to discuss how adults should deal with Harry as savior of the world as it would happen to RL. And as Sherry and PAR said, child who is going to risk his life to save EVERYBODY in WW, including many idiotic adults is in my book entitled to know absolutely everything which may somehow assist him in his task, NOT whatever adults deemed necessary. Now, here we come again to very realistic and understandable desire of the adults to protect the kid and such emotion surely exists in RL, so we can discuss it realistically, BUT when it is measured against "Harry as savior of WW", such emotion IMO becomes a mistake. Understandable, human mistake, mistake for which I cannot begrudge the adults of Potterverse, but NOT the right decision, not at all > Ceridwen: The adults did make mistakes, and > Dumbledore most of all because he had decades more experience in > dealing with children, then came McGonagall, but she was hampered by > not knowing everything DD knew. Molly has her own issues, typical > mother issues, of not really seeing that the kids are more mature > than she thinks. And, the whole thing is muddied up by the > connection between Harry and Voldemort, and just how much do we want > Voldemort to know? Alla: As long as we agree that adults did make mistakes and Dumbledore made plenty of them too, I have no objections to any of that, really. It is the argument that Dumbledore really did not make any mistakes, specifically by virtue of him being an adult (him AND JKR saying to the contrary) makes me want to argue really loudly :-) > Ceridwen: SNIP> >> And, speaking of Harry as Dumbledore's *man*, Dumbledore did treat > him more like an adult in HBP, I think. He didn't cut Harry slack, > and was short with him a few times. He's expecting more thought from > Harry now that he's gotten over his desire to coddle. I don't think > Harry fully rose to the occasion, keeping the secret of the Horcruxes > from McGonagall as he did. Yes, I know Dumbledore told him not to > tell, but that was before Dumbledore's death, which changed things. > Whoever becomes the leader of the Order will need to know all of the > information, as well as what DD had planned. Whoever this is, Harry > will need to inform that person of his mission - and I don't think it > will be Harry. He's got a specific task to do, and can't be bothered > managing everything else. Alla: Ooo, on that I have to disagree. I guess Harry is wrong when he does not listen to Dumbledore's directions and when he does, he is wrong too? :) Dumbledore specifically told him not to include ANYONE else in the Horcrux hunt, except Ron and Hermione. And Harry did just that. I understand what you are saying about Order needing to know what is going on, BUT that goes to what I wrote in the earlier post. Contrary to what we would like ( and trust me, even though I adore Harry's character and enjoy reading about him more than any other character, I would love to see adults more involved too), I believe that Order will not be relevant AT ALL to the battles in book 7. I think that if they are lucky they would get to deal with disarming some DE, or something like that. Harry and his army would be upfront of the battle. If adults get supporting roles, I would consider myself lucky :). But yeah, I think Harry's refusal to include McGonagall in his plans is another one of the indicators that adults will not have much to do in book 7. Of course, IMO. Consider it is to be my prediction for book 7. I am hoping that at least some adults will give Harry some help in Horcruxes hunt, but I am not holding my breath. I suspect that Aberworth may play a role , and if another one of my wishes will come true, maybe Regulus, but I just don't see Order as entity playing an active roll at all. Ceridwen: > But, I think that Harry will do a lot of maturing in book 7. It's > the only chance he's got in the confines of the books. He'll do his > task, things will sink in, he'll discover things and grow. I think > book 7 will be very much Harry's book in this way. Alla: Since I think that he DID rose to the occasion of Dumbledore treating him as an adult in HBP, I think he already matured significantly ( but hey, I am the one who does not think that he was wrong about Snape for the most part, so feel free to disregard.) I suspect that Harry's last step in maturing in book 7 would be him forgiving Snape. I think by " I am not worrying, I am with you", Dumbledore acknowledged Harry's maturing too. Oh, and of course "Dumbledore's man through and through" I guess also signals that. I would much prefer that Harry would say I am my own man through and through to tell you the truth. :) Ceridwen: > Sorry about the 'stream of consciousness' going on. My consciousness > isn't that coherent. Alla: I love your consciousness ;) > PAR: in real life, children have to be told about sexual predators. > About avoiding drugs. In some countries, they had better be well > knowledgeable about land mines and the fact that bad people might > kidnap them and force them to become child soldiers. I don't know > very many children who haven't watched the news which presents facts > of life in explicit detail. News about wars, terrorists, gangs. If > you are putting a child in harm's way, then you aren't treating him > as a child. If you put an individual in harm's way, you have the > obligation to provide that person as much knowledge and help as you > can. And sorry, I don't find that DD has done that. Alla: The thing that stops me from completely embracing your argument is that Dumbledore did NOT initially put Harry in the harm way. Voldemort did. Dumbledore did not CHOOSE to put that ugly scar on Harry's forehead, Voldemort did. He is the one who acted with desire to harm Harry, Dumbledore IMO was mostly reacting, trying to help. Was he always successful? Oh, of course not and I often wanted to slap him for being an "emotional moron", but DD IMO at least tried. As I said above, I absolutely think that Dumbledore made PLENTY of mistakes with Harry and some of them are huge, but those in my book were mistakes of the "fools who love", mistakes of wanting to protect the child from the harm way as much as possible. Or, at least that is what I keep telling myself. :) JMO, Alla From flintwick at sbcglobal.net Mon May 1 21:49:16 2006 From: flintwick at sbcglobal.net (flintwicksgrl) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 21:49:16 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151727 > Pippin: > "the walls and grounds of Hogwarts are guarded by many ancient > spells and charms to ensure the bodily and mental safety of those > who dwell within them" -- OOP ch 24 > > I think the doors were already enchanted to keep out > intruders, but either the door spells didn't work against > animals, or they didn't work against Sirius's 'open anything' > knife. Dear Pippin, I don't think it would be that hard for Sirius to get in; after all, he was one of the four that wrote the map. He probably used the passage from Honeydukes because it leads right into Hogwarts castle. And from there it wouldn't be too hard for someone who is familar with the castle to move around almost undetected. flintwicksgrl From dougsamu at golden.net Mon May 1 21:44:15 2006 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 17:44:15 -0400 Subject: Molly's clock Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151728 http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4690000/newsid_4690800/4690885.stm > Trisha Mittal for the Hindustan Times India - My question is why is > the Weasleys' clock set at Mortal Peril? > > JK Rowling: Mrs Weasley is right, if you don't know what I'm talking > about, the Weasleys have a clock in which each of the 9 hands > represents a member of the family and they point at things like at > work, travelling and so on. Well at the beginning of this book all 9 > hands are pointing at mortal peril. Mrs Weasley is right, she hopes > that everyone is now in danger and she is correct. Well if the deaf > eaters had clocks their hands wouldn't point at mortal peril. And > the Weasley are what are called blood traitors; in other words they > are pure blood but don't act that way. They consort and like > muggles. Therefore they are in the firing line, they would not be > among Voldemort's favourite people? Doug Rogers: "Mrs Weasley is right, she hopes that everyone is now in danger and she is correct." Her thoughts and desires are reflected in the clock hands!?!? Her thoughts are projected into the clock? This is all very interesting to me right now. For some time on another site I have been talking about my theory of Magic, that it is, basically, Imagination made real, that it functions as a kind of projection. It was a bit stunning to have Rowling say this, as above. I hope it isn't some kind of mistranslation? The only other example I have is the explanation by Lupin on casting the Patronus. This would be a second piece of canon. Why are Humans the only primates with chins and nuclear weapons? ____________________ From barefootpuppets at yahoo.com Tue May 2 01:47:09 2006 From: barefootpuppets at yahoo.com (barefootpuppets) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 01:47:09 -0000 Subject: Son of Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151729 No, no. This is not another post about how Snape is really Harry's father My question is this: Is Lucius really Draco's father? Could it be that Snape is actually the father of Draco Malfoy? Crazy sounding? Consider Narcissa went to Snape directly when Draco's life was threatened. (HBP, Spinner's End) Could, perhaps, it be that they had an illicit affair? Narcissa's relationship with Snape (half-blood) would have been forbidden. Could Snape have gone to Dumbledore to ask him to be the Secret-Keeper for his son's true identity? (The reason Dumbledore knows that Snape is on the "good side.") My understanding of a Secret-Keeper is that the secret is only known to those who the Keeper has told ? perhaps even Narcissa would have been affected and believed that Lucius was the father. We also know that Snape is a skilled Occlumens/Legilimens and would likely have been able to hide his true thoughts from Voldemort where others could not. A lot of the storyline has re-emphasized over and over again that Draco is pure-blood. Wouldn't it be ironic if he really wasn't? (Just like something JKR would do!) This also follows the pattern of "love conquers all" that JKR is so fond of. Snape could have discovered that Narcissa was pregnant shortly after he listened at the door at The Boar's Head (Dumbledore's meeting with Trelawney). Perhaps he was worried that the child, also due at the end of the seventh month, might be the one that the prophecy spoke of. (We don't really know Draco's birthdate BUT he didn't take his apparition test and was in Potions on the same day as Harry stayed back from taking the test in HBP.) Or perhaps he just had a reality check and was worried about repercussions against him since Narcissa was pure-blood and was to only marry another pure-blood. Perhaps he didn't want his son to grow up in violence as he did (the vision in OoP where his father was a violent and brutal man). Also note: Draco looks like his mother (when Harry saw him at the World Cup in GoF). But we also hear references to him being "pale" (like Snape?) Snape's favortism ? this has always been attributed to Draco being a Malfoy and a Slytherin what if there were other reasons? This would explain a lot of Snape's behavior in HBP in connection with Draco. I am sure there are more I'd love some feedback on this theory (perhaps it sounds crazy, and rather hair-balled, but I like it). Cheers, Heidi R. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 2 01:55:26 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 01:55:26 -0000 Subject: The Trial of JKR for XC in HP (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151730 J.K. Rowling - God's Smuggler. Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury: Allow me to present the case for the prosecution in the matter of J.K. Rowling and the Use of Christian Symbolism in the Harry Potter books. I will attempt to show, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Ms. Rowling has with clear intent, deliberately and with forethought used symbols and methods of arranging said symbols to construct hidden clues that she knew were of specific significance to the Christian community. Item 1. The Defendant's past history: It is has been well documented here and elsewhere that J.K. Rowling has been know to use subtle clues, embedded clues and play on words throughout her books. Many of these clues are of such a nature as to have only been understood by some, but not all readers. AEB: The name of Remus Lupin. Lupin means wolf and Remus is one of the twin founders of Rome who were raised by wolves. This fact is not common knowledge to all readers. In the HP books Mr. Lupin (once a Professor at Hogwarts) is a werewolf. Also in her own words Ms. Rowling has confessed that she enjoys toying with her readers by dropping tiny clues here and there throughout the books. AEB: Her prideful snickering confession of the tie-in between "smelling of goats" of the Hogshead barkeeper and the fact that DD's brother was tried for "use of inappropriate charms on a goat". Hence the clue that the barman is DD's brother. Item 2. Admission by J.K. Rowling in interviews that she is a Christian and member of the Church of Scotland. In her own words she has made statements on at least 2 occasions that would lead any rational person to conclude that she may be hiding something in her books that have a direct connection with her Christian faith. AEB: "Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.'' (The Vancouver Sun (British Columbia), October 26, 2000) and "Again, there is so much I would like to say, and come back when I've written book seven. But then maybe you won't need to even say it 'cause you'll have found it out anyway. You'll have read it. ("CBCNewsWorld: Hot Type, July 13, 2000) Item 3. C.S. Lewis, whom Ms. Rowling admits to admiring, once said "Let sleeping dragons lie". By this he was referring to a method of writing which he, himself, used in which the conscious mind is unaware of the message being delivered to the subconscious mind. This is like hypnosis which bypasses the defenses of the conscious mind, and speaks directly to the subconscious mind that is more receptive. Ms. Rowling has chosen as the motto for Hogwarts "Never tickle a sleeping dragon". There is a picture of Ms. Rowling on the back of the UK edition of one of the books which shows her in front of her bookcase. This bookcase has a book by Freud, who is know for his work on the subconscious. Together these two bits of information are very telling evidence indeed. Item 4. I hereby present depositions from John Granger, an Eastern Orthodox Christian (one entitled "The Hidden Keys to Harry Potter" and the second "Finding God in Harry Potter") and Father Francis Bridger an Anglican priest from the U.K. ("A Charmed Life: The Spirituality of Potterworld"). Item 5. From the books: Here is the written testimony of our forensic experts and code breakers. The document present here is only a small part of the proof. First, Ms. Rowling has created a fictional world and as such it can be anything that she wants it to be. Yet she has chosen to have the observation of both Christmas and Easter in both the Muggle world and in the Wizarding World. It is just quietly there in the background, but the fact that it is there at all must cause one to wonder, why? It implies that the historical event of the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus has occurred in and for both worlds. It also implies that in both worlds there can be and probably are Christians. One must wonder as to her intent in allowing Christianity as a background presence in this fictional world. Secondly, Ms. Rowling has created a wise old man that she says is the epitome of all goodness. Of course Albus Dumbledore is not necessarily a Christian image. But let us look at what he has done. He is the founder of the Order of the Phoenix. Although not unique to Christianity, the Phoenix has been used by Christians as a symbol of the Resurrection of Jesus. Again we have to wonder what did Ms. Rowling have in mind when she named the Order? It makes one wonder just a bit, since Jesus also had a band of followers that were a rather motley group similar to that of the Order. (Still not enough evidence here to convict the woman, so let us continue on.) Let us look at the person of DD. He was a teacher (of Transfiguration), and later headmaster of the school. Jesus was also a teacher, many called him `Rabbi'. Jesus was able to transfigure. Words of DD: "I will only have truly left this school when none here are loyal to me." and "You will also find that help will always be given at Hogwarts to those who ask for it." (CS: p. 264 US edition.) Words of Jesus: "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:20). and "I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:18) also "The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name- he will teach you everything and remind you of all that [I] told you." (John 14:26) Book I. Baby Harry, half Wizard, half Muggle, comes to the Muggle world from the sky. (Symbolism: Christ coming down from Heaven to dwell as one of us.) Hagrid, Dumbledore, and McGonagall are standing adoringly at the foot of little Harry's basket on the steps of the Muggle home. (Subliminal image: Three magi adoring the Christ child.) Later, first year students can only enter Hogwarts by boat through the water. (Symbolism: Baptism) Lily's death was a sacrifice of Love ( Symbolism: Lily is the Easter flower. Sacrificial death of Jesus.) Mark on Harry's head (Symbolism: reminiscent of the sign of the cross placed on the forehead of the one being baptized at a Christian baptism.) Name of the book: HP and the Philosopher's Stone can be understood as HP and the quest for eternal life. Book II. HP and the Chamber of Secrets: Ginny is led astray into death. (Symbolism: Eve being led astray by the serpent,) When they approach the Chamber it reads" the tunnel was quiet as the grave" (p. 302) Harry goes on alone leaving Ron and Lockhart behind. Only Harry and Ginny are in the `tomb' (Symbolism of Adam and Eve and their death because of the serpent.) Fawkes is the Symbol of Christ. The Chamber is also the Symbol of the Tomb in which Jesus was placed. And it is the resurrection of Christ that brings life back to Adam and Eve. (It is Fawkes that enables Harry to kill the serpent and save Ginny and it is Fawkes that keeps Harry from dying in the Chamber.) This is why Ginny became Harry's real love in book 6, because together they represent the new life of Adam and Eve (humankind) in the risen Christ. There are many more symbols in the other books as well, but for the sake of brevity I will skip ahead to ... Book VI. HP and the Half-Blood Prince. (Symbolism: Christ (Jesus) is both god and man.) Some on the HPFGU list have commented that the vow in Chapter 2 is much like the Anglican Baptismal vow of a Godparent at the Baptism of a child. We also have Narcissa Malfoy pleading for Draco's life by saying "My son, my only son!" (Jesus was God's only son.) However, the most incriminating evidence for the use of explicitly Christian imagery by Ms. Rowling is in the events leading up to the death of DD. Let us first look at the last hours of Jesus: Jesus and his 12 disciples met in an upper room. There are 13 of them at table and Jesus rises to give a blessing. (Remember the words of Trelawney about the number 13 at a table, an old saying which was taken from this event.) At some point Jesus tells Judas "what you are about to do, do quickly". (Relates to DD's "Severus, Please") Later Jesus goes to the garden with Peter, James, and John. (Note the fact that Ms. Rowling chose those very names for 3 of the Marauders. Plus the fact that Sirius (the 4th Marauder) is the morning star. Jesus is called the morning star.) Jesus, thinking about the events to come, prays "Father, let this cup pass from me, but not my will but yours be done". Later Judas brings the Roman guards to arrest Jesus. Those with Jesus draw their swords to fight and Jesus tells them not to. He intends to go willingly. Jesus knows what is going to happen, he has predicted it. He knows that he is going to die and does so willingly. He is beaten, and is placed on the Cross at a place called Golgotha which is translated "the place of the skull". It is believed that he took on the sins of the world (of mankind). He said "I thirst". Three more hours pass and he dies. His bones were not broken as were the two who were crucified with him. He is buried in a tomb with a large rock in front of it. At this point it is believed that Jesus descended into Hell or Hades. (Note: Inferni is Latin for "inhabitants of the lower world (pl.), the shades; the damned; Hell".) Now DD's last hours: DD asks Harry to follow his will no matter how much Harry may not want to, and Harry agrees. DD and Harry go to the area near the cave. The entrance requires a blood sacrifice. DD uses his own blood saying that Harry's is too precious. (One way of looking at this is that Harry himself - the symbol of humanity- is precious in the eyes of DD.) They go over the lake to the pensive and Harry forces DD to drink of the cup 12 times. (12 is the number of Jesus' disciples, the number of the tribes of Israel and symbol of completeness.) DD has what seems like a nightmarish memory when taking the cup. (This can be interpreted as symbolic of Jesus taking on the sins of the world.) And then DD says "water". (Just as Jesus said "I thirst".) DD and Harry are surrounded by the Inferni who rise out of the depth of the lake and are dispelled only by fire. DD and Harry come back to Hogwarts at its highest point, which is the place where the Dark Mark or Skull has been cast. DD is now `at the place of the skull'. Harry is immobilized under the invisibility cloak and becomes the `silent witness' to what is in essence the murder/sacrifice of "Christ". The traitor Draco brings the DE to DD. And Snape (one of his own) kills DD. So that his body may not be corrupted by the werewolf, Snape sends DD's body softly falling from the tower. (This is something of a colorful WW takeoff on the idea of Jesus' body and the notion of `not one bone being broken'.) Then the Gryffindor hourglass broke after being hit by a curse, and the rubies within it fell onto flagstones below. (When Jesus died the veil in the temple was torn in two.) Then we see Fawkes flying over DD's body and singing a song. (Side note: Could this be the same song that Fawkes sang when he came to Harry in the Chamber of Secrets? Makes one wonder if it is part of what will bring DD back to life.) Back to the story of Jesus: Sometime during the hours of the night before dawn on the third day Jesus came back to life and got up and walked out of the tomb. When the women went to the tomb in the early morning they found it empty. He appeared (almost like apparating) in the room where his disciples were hiding. He stayed with them for a number of days and then ascended into heaven. A few days after his ascension, while his disciples were meeting, the spirit in a form of a dove came to them. This gave them courage that they did not have before, and with His spirit within them they went on to do the same miracles that Jesus did. It is believed that His spirit is with each person that asks for Him. And this spirit helps the person. SO we can see if any of this continues into book 7. Because is may be the spirit of DD (in the form of a phoenix rather than a dove) that helps Harry to overcome LV. Summation: It has been well documented and the defendant has openly admitted in interviews that she has used ideas and symbolism from many sources for the content of her books. It should come as no surprise that Ms. Rowling has also used ideas and images from the Christian Bible as well. Does this mean that Ms. Rowling is writing a Christian story? Maybe, maybe not. If yes, its it only for Christians? No. Does it mean that Ms. Rowling is intent on converting others to Christianity? IMO, the answer is again "No". While the underlying message is one that many Christians will recognize as the Gospel message of the triumph of Love over evil and death, the message of the Harry Potter books is a message for all people and for all time. The message is deeply entwined within the story in such a way as to get past the sleeping dragon of our conscious mind and sneak quietly into our unconscious. As it permeates our subconscious and seeps into the deepest level of our mind to the very core of our being we resonate with the message because it is a message that has already been written on the collective heart of humanity since the beginning of time. It is the same message that has come to us from ancient times in many forms, through many cultures, and philosophical systems, but the message is one message for all people and all time. The Prosecution rests its case and ask that you find Ms. Rowling guilty as charged. Tonks_op From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 02:15:59 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 02:15:59 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060430235235.9937.qmail@web61317.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151731 > >>Joe: > First let me say that I can not think of a worst example of a > sports article ever. > Betsy Hp: I thought it was pretty amusing. She did miss the point that quidditch is *supposed* to be maddingly complicated and chaotic and that it can all change on one person's single action. It echos the wizarding world in all it's glory, and I think it was a brilliant invention by JKR. But you don't get that if you haven't read the books. The big problem I have with quidditch as a sport is the tiny team. I mean, the very fact that Harry had to scramble to train Dean up when Katie got sick was plan weird to my mind. There should be several chasers, etc., training with the team just in case of sudden injury (or detention). Of course, that could be a British thing for all I know. [My favorite made up sport? That game in Ender's Game. I mean, how cool would that be to play? Heck of lot cooler than getting beaned by iron balls, IMO.] > >>kchuplis: > Maybe my definition of sportsmanship is faulty. I think of it just > as much in terms of gracious winning as gracious losing. I also > think of it as being in the behaviour of the the participant and > not the judges. *Harry* didn't ask to be put equal. The judges > (read DD) chose that. I don't recall him gloating about it. He > just accepted it. To me, at any rate, "good sportsmanship" doesn't > mean Harry would have to put a big fuss up and insist on being > placed lower. That's just silly. Betsy Hp: But doesn't that lessen Cedric's protest of the Hufflepuff win in PoA? After all, *Cedric* kicked up a fuss that his grabbing the snitch shouldn't count because Harry was knocked out by dementors. Was he just being silly? On the other hand, I don't hold Harry at all responsible for the judges activities. He'd decided to forfeit the race in order to make sure the other hostages were safe. He did behave graciously, as did the other champions. It was the judges who cheapened Harry's actions. Harry isn't to blame for that. > >>Magpie: > > Other examples of good sportsmanship? Err, there's a couple of > places where JKR seems to be highlighting Harry being a good > sport. > > Usually "good sportsmanship" seems to just get thrown around to > describe how other people are fighting terribly dirty. Generally > whenever our guys are playing a game where they're just having fun > it seems likeit's supposed to be good sportsmanship, even when > they're being tricky or trash talk later. Betsy Hp: That's a continual problem in the Potterverse, IMO. Like when the twins complain about Slytherin's spying on the Gryffindor practice, because that's just so not done, and then come running back to report on what they found out *while spying on the Slytherin practice*. Or how it's just horrible that the Slytherins have such good brooms, but isn't it great when Harry gets the best broom on the market? There's a bit of eating her cake and having it too, I think, within the school competitions. > >>a_svirn: > > And I agree that there is nothing sportsmanlike about awarding > points for "moral fiber". In fact, it's downright ridiculous. Betsy Hp: And, most importantly, it lessens the moral fiber being demonstrated. Harry made the hard choice to give up on the race and look after the hostages. And Dumbledore turned around and made it an easy choice. > >>Magpie: > One of the hilarious things about GoF is that we're always > encouraged to sympathize with Harry for being the underdog but > Rowling just can't bring herself to have him lose at anything. Betsy Hp: And that's another problem, IMO. Harry never loses. Not at any sort of school competition, not ever. GoF is just the most egregious case. But there's no way Harry can possibly be painted as the underdog at Hogwarts. That would be Draco, honestly. And I think it is a problem that Harry never gets to learn what it's like to lose. Even (as you point out in the part I snipped) the prefect position was supposed to be his. > >>Magpie: > He's still acting like he can't possibly win when he's in first > place right out of the gate... > Betsy Hp: And that's what keeps Harry likable, IMO. He really does *see* himself as the underdog, poor love. Just like he thinks he's a big loser who can't pull a date for the Yule Ball when girls are falling all over him. He's so introverted (or something) he has a hard time seeing his own popularity and power. > >>Magpie: > > Most kids have to deal with disappointments, and making > mistakes for good reasons that they still have to suffer for. Betsy Hp: I suppose this is where one could say that Harry's hardship under the Dursleys taught him all the life lessons he needs about losing, etc. I don't buy it myself, and while I like the books overall, I don't think they do a thing for demonstrating sportsmanship. In fact it sends the unrealistic message that good people always win and bad people always lose. ("The bad guys are easily identified by their black hats" and other lies Giles told me. ) Betsy Hp From puduhepa98 at aol.com Tue May 2 02:20:18 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 22:20:18 EDT Subject: Fleur and Harry's POV Message-ID: <3dc.15d106b.31881be2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151732 >Carol : >And don't forget Fleur, who is tearfully grateful to Harry and not >only doesn't resent his getting all those points when she came in >last, but says when she's awarded 25 points, "I deserved zero." Yes, >Harry saved her sister, but he did what *she* was supposed to do and >she could have been resentful rather than grateful once she realized >that no one was going to let her sister drown. And she retains her >gratitude afterwards. The contest was nothing to her; Harry's heroism >and her sister's life were everything. >Carol, who never cared much for Fleur but was moved to tears by that >moment Nikkalmati: Fleur seemed like an interesting minor character in GOF, so what happened in HBP? Now she is marrying Bill who came back from Egypt, why? Her place in the story has expanded with Bill's attack by a werewolf, making him closely related to Lupin, and his curse-breaking skills which may play a role in Harry's horcrux hunt. And her wedding is likely to be one of the opening scenes in HBP II, even if the tiara is not a horcrux, as has been proposed. She is likely to be around a lot in the next book. So much between her and Bill seems to have happened when we weren't watching. Is this just a matter of being tied to Harry's POV? Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gelite67 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 02:38:04 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 02:38:04 -0000 Subject: Breaking the Priori Incantatum?. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151733 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > gelite67 Wrote: > > > Any theories on how Harry/LV are going > > to overcome the Priori Incantatum effect? > > Why would Harry want to overcome Priori Incantatum when the last time > it saved his life. The stronger will force the weaker to regurgitate > old spells rather than do his master's bidding, and 3 years ago Harry > proved himself to be stronger than Voldemort, at least stronger in > magical arm wrestling like they did in the graveyard in book 4. > Voldemort might want to get around Priori Incantatum but not Harry. > > Eggplant > Angie replies: Harry would want to overcome the spell for the exact same reason as LV would: it seems that the spell would have to be broken in order for one to kill the other. Harry would want to overcome the spell so that he can conquer LV for good -- neither is interested in repeated bouts of magical arm wrestling (love that term!). From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 03:04:33 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 03:04:33 -0000 Subject: Child Saviors and realism (was:Re: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151734 > >>Ceridwen: > > > > A lot of people want JKR to write believably for the Real World, > > in things like comeuppance for characters they see as abusive. > > If she will, then why not write realistically for children who > > are still too young to see beyond what their limited experience > > shows them? > >>Alla: > > Children who are going to save the world, do NOT to the best of my > knowledge exist in RL :), that is why IMO it is impossible to > discuss how adults should deal with Harry as savior of the world > as it would happen to RL. > Betsy Hp: Okay, this is a bit strange, and may have to do with the late hour, but... Training up a child to take a position where she or he may have to "save the world" was once a real life endeavor. Elizabeth I of England, Alexander the Great, etc., real movers and shakers on the world stage *were* trained as children to assume the power they came to later in life. (And one could argue that they saved their worlds when they came into their power.) I think Plato had a whole thing on the perfect match between a philosopher and the ruler he trains up. And I believe Machiavelli wrote "The Prince" with the idea of providing training for a child in becoming a proper ruler. So while there's certainly a lot of trope to the wiseman and young hero storyline, there is a bit of truth to it too. For a great deal of human history anyway. So it *is* possible to look at how Harry is treated in a realistic way, IMO. To see if his training fits with the task assigned to him, to see if Dumbledore is bringing him into his own or holding him back. The extended childhood of modern times is a fairly new thing. And Harry is going to save the world while technically an adult. (Unless JKR takes a strange turn in book 7, of course.) Alexander was already ruling while his father was away by that age. And had successfully lead men in battle, I believe. Yeah, just wanted to point that out. No idea if it means anything. :) Betsy Hp From rhetorician18 at hotmail.com Tue May 2 03:13:35 2006 From: rhetorician18 at hotmail.com (Rachel Crofut) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 23:13:35 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Son of Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151735 Heidi R: >Could it be that Snape is actually the father of Draco Malfoy? >Perhaps he didn't >want his son to grow up in violence as he did (the vision in OoP where >his father was a violent and brutal man). >Draco looks like his mother (when Harry saw him at the World Cup in >GoF). But we also hear references to him being "pale" (like Snape?) Rachel here: Blonde is a recessive trait and IIRC (alas, I'm without my books!) Snape's parents (or at least mother) has dark hair. Unless Snape is harboring some deep deep blonde genes I find Lucius a much more likely candidate. Not to mention there are many references to Draco's face being "pointy", much like Lucius'. No, I think it's fair to say that Draco is the brat of Lucius and Narcissa. Heidi R: >Snape's favortism this has always been attributed to Draco being a >Malfoy and a Slytherinwhat if there were other reasons? Rachel again: I think this is because Draco is in constant contact with his family. Snape would know that if Voldemort ever did reappear that Lucius would immediately be at his side. If Snape had in any way hinted that he wasn't Voldemort's man, Voldie would have known very quickly. There are/were many DEs that would have killed for the chance to take down Snape (Bellatrix, anyone?). If Snape is DDM!Snape then this is probably just to cover his own skin. ~ Rachel _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 03:16:40 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 03:16:40 -0000 Subject: Child Saviors and realism (was:Re: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151736 > > >>Alla: > > > > Children who are going to save the world, do NOT to the best of my > > knowledge exist in RL :), that is why IMO it is impossible to > > discuss how adults should deal with Harry as savior of the world > > as it would happen to RL. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Okay, this is a bit strange, and may have to do with the late hour, > but... Training up a child to take a position where she or he may > have to "save the world" was once a real life endeavor. So while there's certainly a lot of trope to the wiseman and young > hero storyline, there is a bit of truth to it too. For a great deal > of human history anyway. > > So it *is* possible to look at how Harry is treated in a realistic > way, IMO. To see if his training fits with the task assigned to > him, to see if Dumbledore is bringing him into his own or holding > him back. The extended childhood of modern times is a fairly new > thing. And Harry is going to save the world while technically an > adult. (Unless JKR takes a strange turn in book 7, of course.) > Alexander was already ruling while his father was away by that age. > And had successfully lead men in battle, I believe. Alla: Yes, I thought about famous people who did heroic things when I sent my post too :) So, yes, of course there are plenty of "world shakers' who started early that is absolutely true, there are also child heroes (like kids who during Second world war fought against Nazi, etc, etc), but I am not talking about starting doing tough things early. I am specifically talking about the child, on whose shoulders lies the fate of the world. Alexander the Great conquered the world or a lot of the world anyways, IMO he did not save it. So, while I absolutely agree that there are many real life children who either started training for hard life ahead early or did heroic things, I don't think that such children had task of such magnitude, something so huge and obligatory. Makes sense? Oh, and of course I should say that theoretically it is possible - as in existance of the child who should save the world, it is just in practice, I don't think anything comes close to the task that lies ahead of Harry. ( in RL, not in literature, of course there are plenty examples in literature). And one more thing , if such child indeed existed ( the one on whose shoulders lied the burden of saving the world from the mainiac) in RL, I would say the same thing - that such child should be treated accordingly and that such child is entitled to know everything that can help him. Actually to the question when, I probably have the same answer as you did in earlier posts - when such child starts asking questions. JMO, Alla From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 2 03:28:49 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 23:28:49 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Son of Snape? References: Message-ID: <009201c66d98$87b10620$736c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151737 barefootpuppets: Snape could have discovered that Narcissa was pregnant shortly after he listened at the door at The Boar's Head (Dumbledore's meeting with Trelawney). Perhaps he was worried that the child, also due at the end of the seventh month, might be the one that the prophecy spoke of. (We don't really know Draco's birthdate BUT he didn't take his apparition test and was in Potions on the same day as Harry stayed back from taking the test in HBP.) Magpie: Draco's birthday is June 5th. barefootpuppets: Or perhaps he just had a reality check and was worried about repercussions against him since Narcissa was pure-blood and was to only marry another pure-blood. Perhaps he didn't want his son to grow up in violence as he did (the vision in OoP where his father was a violent and brutal man). Magpie: I can't imagine this story doing much for Harry, though. It makes it have nothing to do with him or the Potters and Harry's not interested in either Snape or Malfoy's family line much at this point. barefootpuppets: Also note: Draco looks like his mother (when Harry saw him at the World Cup in GoF). But we also hear references to him being "pale" (like Snape?). Magpie: Draco also looks very much like his father. His parents are both blond and pale, and Draco has his father's grey eyes rather than his mother's blue. I believe the first time we meet Lucius Harry recognizes him as Draco's father because they look so much alike. Snape is sallow, not pale. barefootpuppets: Snape's favortism - this has always been attributed to Draco being a Malfoy and a Slytherin.what if there were other reasons? This would explain a lot of Snape's behavior in HBP in connection with Draco. Magpie: I think he liked Lucius and as the years go by he likes Draco. Fandom's solution has always had to do with Snape's spying with the idea that he's pretending to like Draco because that's part of his cover (and pretending to hate Harry too, sometmes) but I don't think Snape's very good at faking emotions. They make an odd pair in some ways, but I buy it. I think this is what's supposed to explain his interaction with Draco in HBP. JKR was always reminding us that they seemed to have a personal relationship because she knew it would eventually be of some importance to the plot. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 04:15:10 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 04:15:10 -0000 Subject: Molly's clock In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151738 JK Rowling: Mrs Weasley is right, she hopes > > that everyone is now in danger and she is correct. > Doug Rogers: > > "Mrs Weasley is right, she hopes that everyone is now in danger and > she is correct." > > Her thoughts and desires are reflected in the clock hands!?!? Her > thoughts are projected into the clock? It was a bit stunning to have Rowling say this, as above. > I hope it isn't some kind of mistranslation? Carol responds: It's possible that the interview is mistranscribed ("deaf eaters"?), but I think the real problem is JKR's tendency to trip over herself and interrupt herself in interviews and other off-the-cuff comments so that her meaning is unclear. (Occasionally, IMO, she's deliberately ambiguous, but I don't think that's the case here.) I don't think she meant to imply that the clock reflects Molly's wishes or that Molly wants everyone to be in mortal peril. I *think* she means that Molly hopes that it isn't just her clock; that all the clocks all the clocks of that sort are pointing to "mortal peril" simply because the WW at large is in danger, as opposed to her family in particular. It's like the difference between a red alert that applies to everyone and a bomb threat aimed at one particular family. She doesn't want her family to be in any more danger than anyone else. Now I, for one, thought it was silly for Molly to carry the clock around when the hands were *already* pointing to mortal peril. What's the point? The situation, according to the clock, is already as dire as it's going to get. The hands can't move to mortal peril because they're already there, and the Weasleys are as safe as they *can* be in their own home. I also don't like the fact that when a family member really *is* in mortal peril, for example Bill when he's savaged by Fenrir Greyback, that increased danger is not reflected by the clock, which shows him in the same situation as Molly and Arthur when they're sitting down to dinner. It's not a Flint, exactly, but it's (IMO) a potentially effective plot device that hasn't been used as well as it could have been. And I do suspect that the Burrow isn't the safe haven it seems to be, but still, when we see the Weasleys at Christmas time in HBP, they're not in danger *yet,* or at least no more danger than the average witch or wizard. But to repeat, I really doubt that Molly hopes that everyone is in danger and that this hop is reflected in the clock's hands, which of course show only her own family's supposed degree of danger. She only hopes, IMO, that the clock reflects the condition of the WW in general and not the specific situation of her family. (I wish it had been handled otherwise, but obviously I'm not writing the books.) Carol, who used to envision Molly standing immobile as Percy's clock hand moved to mortal peril but now thinks we won't get any such dramatic moment From puduhepa98 at aol.com Tue May 2 04:14:38 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 00:14:38 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Headmaster Portraits (was Re: Dumbledore dead?) Message-ID: <2f8.492afa1.318836ae@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151739 >Leonard: > I think in general, one can certainly have magical > portraits of oneself without being dead. Someone will > have to check this, but Gilderoy Lockhart would be my > guess as a canonical mention of a living, portraited > person if there is one. >houyhnhnm: > But why should there be any reason a living person >could not be the subject of a painting as well? In fact, wouldn't the >subject have to be living at the time the painting was created, >whether by magic or by someone wielding a brush? >At any rate, there is another example. Sirius thought the reason his >mother's portrait would not come down was because she put a permanent >sticking charm on it. So she must have been alive not only when the >portrait was created, but also when it was hung. Leonard: > I personally think the portrait is evidence only for > Dumbledore no longer being Headmaster of Hogwarts. > He's not necessarily dead. Nikkalmati: Certainly, DD could have had a portrait of himself prepared while he was alive and it would make sense for him to do so. I don't think that the portrait "magically" hung itself in the headmaster's office. Probably, Filtch put it up as part of the funeral preparations. Therefore, the existence of the portrait does not prove anything. The key factor is that the portrait has not yet begun to behave like the other portraits. When it does, I will be more inclined to take its presence as an indication the headmaster is gone. Nikkalmati >houyhnhnm: >Now I am starting to wonder. Perhaps it is necessary for the readers >to be as convinced as Harry that DD is gone, to feel as alone as Harry >does, so that we will be able to empathize with him as he completes >the next stage of his journey. >Harry will defeat Voldemort without Dumbledore, but DD may be revealed >to be alive. What purpose would it serve to have DD still be alive? >It would exonerate Snape in a way that could be accepted by all >readers, and while I'm not certain about whether or not Dumbledore is >alive, I am absolutely certain that he was not treacherously murdered >by Snape. , Nikkalmati: Yes, Harry has to go on alone or with his close friends to fulfill the pattern of PS/CS, the COS, GOF and the motif of the "hero's quest", so DD had to be removed for purposes of the plot. I don't believe DD will come back just to exonerate SS, because that would be too easy. JKR wants part of Harry's journey to be a struggle to understand SS's role in the struggle against LV. However, DD can return at the end without taking part in the quest or he could have engineered his own disappearance, not to abandon Harry, but 1. to give credibility to SS with LV; 2. to lure LV out of hiding; 3 to give himself free rein in the hunt for and destruction of the horcruxes or all of the above. In the latter case, DD has to conceal his existence from Harry (again!) because Harry is surrounded by possible spies and Harry himself cannot for sure conceal anything he knows from LV. Nikkalmati (not sure if DD is alive, but thinking that phoenix rising from the flames and other issues raised here in the list must mean something) :>). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 2 06:51:17 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 06:51:17 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151740 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > ...edited... > > [My favorite made up sport? That game in Ender's Game. I mean, > how cool would that be to play? Heck of lot cooler than getting > beaned by iron balls, IMO.] > bboyminn: HP fans may talk among themselves or let their minds wander freely during this short diversion. Ooooh! Your an Ender fan, may I say 'I love you'. I just finished the books (all eight) for about the third or fouth time. I keep imagining that in the future New!Peter will meet Bean's kids, or dare I hope, maybe even Bean himself. I heard Orson Scott Card is suppose to be publishing a continuation of the series soon; can't wait. > ...edited... > > > >>Magpie: > > > > ...edited... > > > > Usually "good sportsmanship" seems to just get thrown around to > > describe how other people are fighting terribly dirty. Generally > > whenever our guys are playing a game where they're just having fun > > it seems like it's supposed to be good sportsmanship, even when > > they're being tricky or trash talk later. > > Betsy Hp: > That's a continual problem in the Potterverse, IMO. Like when the > twins complain about Slytherin's spying on the Gryffindor practice, > because that's just so not done, and then come running back to > report on what they found out *while spying on the Slytherin > practice*. Or how it's just horrible that the Slytherins have such > good brooms, but isn't it great when Harry gets the best broom on > the market? There's a bit of eating her cake and having it too, I > think, within the school competitions. > bboyminn: So, what you are saying is that they are acting exactly like teens all over the world. I'm reminded of 'Malcom in the Middle'. Malcom and/or Reese and/or Dewey will do the most outrageous things, and when Lois gets on their case about it, the first thing they whine is "But it's not fair". To quote Phineas Nigellus: "Young people are so infernally convinced that they are absolutely right about everything. ... No, like all young people, you are quite sure that you alone feel and think, you alone recognise danger, you alone are the only one clever enough to realise what the Dark Lord may be planning ? " OK, it's not a perfectly applicable quote. Rather than look at this as the author portraying life in some less than perfect way, why not look at it as the characters acting exactly like people their age act? > > >>Magpie: > > One of the hilarious things about GoF is that we're always > > encouraged to sympathize with Harry for being the underdog but > > Rowling just can't bring herself to have him lose at anything. > > Betsy Hp: > And that's another problem, IMO. Harry never loses. Not at any > sort of school competition, not ever. GoF is just the most > egregious case. But there's no way Harry can possibly be painted as > the underdog at Hogwarts. ... > > > >>Magpie: > > He's still acting like he can't possibly win when he's in first > > place right out of the gate... > > > > Betsy Hp: > And that's what keeps Harry likable, IMO. He really does *see* > himself as the underdog, poor love. ... > bboyminn: But Harry is the underdog and he does lose, and, to some extent, he loses graciously. That's sportsmanship. In GoF, especially with regard to the underwater task under discussion, Harry is well aware that he lost, and he accepts his loss. He's not complaining at all, and is somewhat embarassed not by losing, but by having taken the song seriously. I think in that moment, he felt he deserved to lose, and he graciously accepted that Viktor and Cedric had beaten him. When the facts came out, and it became clear that Harry reached the hostages with a clear lead, and the judges saw fit to award Harry points for moral fiber, he also accepted that graciously. He knew there was a limit to the quality of his win, and he accepted that. In the first task, Harry is aware that he had unusual help, and he tried to even the contest by telling Cedric. That certainly seems like sportsmanship to me. I don't think he felt a great deal of guilt about winning the Dragon task because he was aware that ALL the champions had advance knowledge, and he did use an uniquely effective method of getting past the dragons. Yes, some could say that Moody told him what to do. But Moody specifically refrained from coming right out and saying it; he let Harry discover the specifics he needed from the general advice Moody gave. Further, Moody seemed to justify it to Harry by saying, and rightly so, that the other Headmasters would help their champions all they could. In the final maze task, Harry is aware the Cedric beat him. He is disappointed but accepts it. At that moment Cedric display good sportsmanship by offering the Cup to Harry. Harry declines and offers to take it together. Again, an act of good sportsmanship. After Harry finds out the circumstances under which he won; that is, Moody's assistance, Harry tries his best to refuse the Prize, not only the prize of money, but the prise of winning. When he is forced to accept the money, he gives it to Fred and George. Again, that looks like good sportsmanship to me. Harry is well aware that he did not win fair and square, but what can he do about it? Everyone insists that Harry won by default. Harry would rather not win at all, because he knows in his heart that he truly did not win. Now A_Svrin seems to be making the point that it was the judges who displayed poor sportsmanship not the contestants. He doesn't agree with my position, but I still say that the tournement was a test of character as much as a test of knowledge, and that Harry displayed the very character the judges were looking for. Consequently, I say the points were awarded fairly and within the context of the tournement. To say that Harry never loses, is to say that he is completely unaware of the nature of his wins. Harry knows full well that he had help that gave him an unfair advantage, and he is fully aware that his victories are hollow and flawed. If he gloated over those victories I would have a problem, but Harry is very humble and modest about it, and that carries a lot of weight with me. Just more rambling. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 2 07:00:18 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 07:00:18 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151741 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: a_svirn: > And let us not forget that where cunning and resourcefulness are > concerned Harry failed spectacularly. He never solved anything by > himself; he only made it through the tasks because Crouch made sure > that he would. Actually, even his daring in this instance is > questionable ? since he was compelled to participate by the > unbreakable magical contract. No wonder he didn't want the prize > money. It was unfairly gained and *indeed* should have been Cedric's. Geoff: If I might misquote Shakespeare - "Some are born to take part in the Tri-Wizard Tournament, some achieve taking part in the Tri-Wizard Tournament, and some have taking part in the Tri-Wizard Tournament thrust upon them." :-) Once the age limit has been announced, apart from a little daydreaming, Harry had accepted that he would be a spectator. He was pitchforked unwillingly into the tournament, hating the fact that the school thought him to be a cheat. He didn't know until the end that the person who, apparently, was on his side and took him under his wing was the actual creator of all his turmoil and was working towards causing his death; Harry was working all the time at a disadvantage because of his age and inexperience. He did not "fail spectacularly". He had to be given hints as to how to tackle the tasks but who was it who got the golden egg by dint of his prowess at flying? It wasn't fake Moody. Who was it who actually swam under the lake, coped with the Grindylows and the Merpeople and decided (maybe unnecessarily) that he needed to help Gabrielle Derlacour? It wasn't fake Moody. Who was it who, in the maze, coped with Blast-ended Skrewts, Boggarts, a Sphinx and a spider and took time out to help Fleur and Cedric along the way? It wasn't fake Moody. Sure, he needed to be helped to get launched into the three tasks but when he was involved, it was he alone who managed to get through al the various dangers which he met. No one handled his dragon for him; no one dealt with the underwater creatures and no one stood between him and the eprils in the maze. "Failed spectacularly"? I think that is a harsh judgment on someone who was being manipulated for evil ends. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue May 2 07:12:41 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 07:12:41 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151742 > > a_svirn: > And let us not forget that where cunning and resourcefulness are > concerned Harry failed spectacularly. He never solved anything by > himself; he only made it through the tasks because Crouch made sure > that he would. Actually, even his daring in this instance is > questionable ? since he was compelled to participate by the > unbreakable magical contract. No wonder he didn't want the prize > money. It was unfairly gained and *indeed* should have been Cedric's. > Hickengruendler: Except that Cedric didn't solve very much on his own either. Harry told him about the dragons. I suppose he did come up with a plan how to get th egg himself, but later it was Moody, who told him to open the egg under water. Therefore Cedric did have some help as well, as did Viktor and Fleur. I suppose neither had as much as Harry, but ultimately I didn't mind all the help Harry got, for two reasons. 1.) He didn't ask to participate in this tournament, while the others did. While I agree with what sistermagpie wrote in an earlier post, that Harry never was the real outsider because JKR didn't allow him to be one, he nonetheless did not want to participate and it was due to circumstances outside his control, that he had to. Therefore I think he deserved every help he could get. 2.) Harry and his friends thought that his life was in danger. It therefore was much more than just a game for him, he theoretically could have expected a murder attack any time. In fact, Moody even made them believe that the fact that his name came out of the goblet already was the murder attack. That said, I do find it extraordinaly stupid, that he honestly thought the judges would have let any of those hostages in the lake die. But the other champions didn't seem to think much clearer about this either. Fleur honestly seemed to have thought that Gabrielle was in real danger and Cedric later tells Harry, that he should have stayed back as well. This only leaves Viktor Krum as someone, who might not have believed this. Hickengruendler From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue May 2 07:23:37 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 07:23:37 -0000 Subject: Molly's clock In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151743 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Now I, for one, thought it was silly for Molly to carry the clock > around when the hands were *already* pointing to mortal peril. What's > the point? The situation, according to the clock, is already as dire > as it's going to get. The hands can't move to mortal peril because > they're already there, and the Weasleys are as safe as they *can* be > in their own home. Hickengruendler: Well, there is something worse than mortal peril, namely that one of them indeed dies. Maybe Molly took the clock with her, because she was afraid that one of the hands would suddenly disappear. Therefore in some way it might be a relieve to her, that all hands are still pointing at moral pertil. > I also don't like the fact that when a family > member really *is* in mortal peril, for example Bill when he's savaged > by Fenrir Greyback, that increased danger is not reflected by the > clock, which shows him in the same situation as Molly and Arthur when > they're sitting down to dinner. Hickengruendler: That's my biggest problem as well. What's the point now? As it seems, the clock is of a better use in peace than in an actual wartime. Hickengruendler From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue May 2 09:18:25 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 09:18:25 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151744 > Geoff: > He did not "fail spectacularly". He had to be given hints as to how to tackle the tasks but > who was it who got the golden egg by dint of his prowess at flying? It wasn't fake Moody. a_svirn: I said he failed spectacularly *where cunning and resourcefulness are concerned*. I did not question his flying skills. Or courage. > Geoff: > Who was it who, in the maze, coped with Blast-ended Skrewts, Boggarts, a Sphinx and a > spider and took time out to help Fleur and Cedric along the way? It wasn't fake Moody. a_svirn: Yes it was. "You had an easier time of it than you should have in that maze tonight, of course," said Moody. "I was patrolling around it, able to see through the outer hedges, able to curse many obstacles out of your way. I Stunned Fleur Delacour as she passed. I put the Im-perius Curse on Krum, so that he would finish Diggory and leave your path to the cup clear." > Geoff: > "Failed spectacularly"? I think that is a harsh judgment on someone who was being > manipulated for evil ends. a_svirn: It wasn't judgment at all. It was statement of the fact. Harry never solved a single problem on his own. Well, except for the Sphinx. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue May 2 09:37:59 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 09:37:59 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151745 > Hickengruendler: > > Except that Cedric didn't solve very much on his own either. Harry > told him about the dragons. I suppose he did come up with a plan how > to get th egg himself, but later it was Moody, who told him to open > the egg under water. Therefore Cedric did have some help as well, as > did Viktor and Fleur. a_svirn: Still his score is better than that of Harry. Harry got tips *and* solutions on a silver platter. Cedric got tips but came up with solutions by himself. > Hickengruendler: > I suppose neither had as much as Harry, but ultimately I didn't mind > all the help Harry got, for two reasons. 1.) He didn't ask to > participate in this tournament, while the others did. While I agree > with what sistermagpie wrote in an earlier post, that Harry never was > the real outsider because JKR didn't allow him to be one, he > nonetheless did not want to participate and it was due to > circumstances outside his control, that he had to. Therefore I think > he deserved every help he could get. 2.) Harry and his friends > thought that his life was in danger. It therefore was much more than > just a game for him, he theoretically could have expected a murder > attack any time. In fact, Moody even made them believe that the fact > that his name came out of the goblet already was the murder attack. a_svirn: I agree with your every word. But what it has to do with good sportsmanship? > Hickengruendler: > That said, I do find it extraordinaly stupid, that he honestly > thought the judges would have let any of those hostages in the lake > die. a_svirn: I don't find it stupid at all. If he placed little confidence in Dumbledore's security measures, who can blame him? He had every reason to be leery of them. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue May 2 09:55:13 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 09:55:13 -0000 Subject: Child Saviors and realism (was:Re: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151746 > Betsy Hp: > Okay, this is a bit strange, and may have to do with the late hour, > but... Training up a child to take a position where she or he may > have to "save the world" was once a real life endeavor. Elizabeth I > of England, Alexander the Great, etc., real movers and shakers on > the world stage *were* trained as children to assume the power they > came to later in life. (And one could argue that they saved their > worlds when they came into their power.) a_svirn: ???! Could one? Elisabeth I of England wasn't even supposed to be a queen let along to save the world. As for Alexander the Great, I suppose he was schooled in the arts of war, but conquering worlds is not quite the same thing as saving them. > Betsy Hp: I think Plato had a whole > thing on the perfect match between a philosopher and the ruler he > trains up. And I believe Machiavelli wrote "The Prince" with the > idea of providing training for a child in becoming a proper ruler. a_svirn: I don't believe that Plato wrote for children. As for Machiavelli, he endeavoured to instruct aspiring princes how to save their own skins, rather than those of their subjects. As for "saving the world", I think he would have found the very idea amusing. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 2 10:46:26 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 10:46:26 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151747 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > > Geoff: > > He did not "fail spectacularly". He had to be given hints as to > how to tackle the tasks but > > who was it who got the golden egg by dint of his prowess at > flying? It wasn't fake Moody. > > a_svirn: > I said he failed spectacularly *where cunning and resourcefulness > are concerned*. I did not question his flying skills. Or courage. Geoff: He was cunning enough to know how to coax the dragon away from her egg and nearly managed it unscathed. He took an independent decision to save Gabrielle as well as Ron; OK, you may say that the danger was percieved rather than real but Harry didn't see it in that light. Crouch may have stunned Fleur and put an Imperius curse on Krum but he didn't help with the Blast-ended Skrewts, the Boggart, the Sphinx and the spider. Harry, in fact, rescued Cedric from Krum and they worked together on the spider. Cedric admits to Harry: "That's twice you've saved my neck in here." (GOF "The Third Task" p.549 UK edition). I believe that he showed cunning and resourcefulness. I agree that he did not know that the tournament was being manipulated but the fact still is that, outside of Crouch!Moody's machinations, he did actually achieve some results on his own. Let's give a little credit where credit is due. Harry needed a push to get him going but he didn't get the whole thing handed to him on a plate... That is an oversimplification of the events. From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Tue May 2 06:29:45 2006 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 02:29:45 EDT Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter Message-ID: <254.a10192c.31885659@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151748 > a_svirn: > And let us not forget that where cunning and resourcefulness are > concerned Harry failed spectacularly. He never solved anything by > himself; he only made it through the tasks because Crouch made sure > that he would. Actually, even his daring in this instance is > questionable ? since he was compelled to participate by the > unbreakable magical contract. No wonder he didn't want the prize > money. It was unfairly gained and *indeed* should have been Cedric's. > > Sandy: The only reason he was in the Tournament was because Crouch got him into it. Considering he was three years underage for it to begin with I don't have a problem with any of his *failures* as you put it. I don't question his daring either because he didn't have any desire to break the age restriction and be in the Tournament to begin with, so why would he want the money? What, to me, was unfair was that he was forced by the unbreakable magic contract to compete despite the fact he did not enter his name and had no desire to do so. To criticize Harry in any way about anything regarding the Tournament is grossly unfair. Just my opinion. Sandy From cassy_ferris at yahoo.com Tue May 2 08:58:58 2006 From: cassy_ferris at yahoo.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 12:58:58 +0400 (MSD) Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060502085858.36833.qmail@web38314.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151749 Alla quoted Melissa Anelli & JKR: >MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in >front of Harry? >JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never >happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, >knew that could happen." Cassy: I'm sorry if this issue was already discussed, I'm new here, but that is the point I always wondered about: why it never happened before? LV killed so many families, surely some mother would stand in front of her child in effort to protect him/her? We can't assume that Lily's love was of some "higher quality," so it worked better. Or was it that LV gave Lily a choice wether to die or not? But why exactly did he do it, wasted his time trying to convince a defenseless woman to stand aside? Cassy From dougsamu at golden.net Tue May 2 08:38:37 2006 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 04:38:37 -0400 Subject: Molly's clock In-Reply-To: <1146554802.942.12900.m19@yahoogroups.com> References: <1146554802.942.12900.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151750 Doug Rogers, previously: >> [Quoting JKR from an interview:] >> "Mrs Weasley is right, she hopes that everyone is now in danger and >> she is correct." >> >> Her thoughts and desires are reflected in the clock hands!?!? Her >> thoughts are projected into the clock? >> It was a bit stunning to have Rowling say this, as above. >> I hope it isn't some kind of mistranslation? Carol responded: > It's possible that the interview is mistranscribed ("deaf eaters"?), > but I think the real problem is JKR's tendency to trip over herself > and interrupt herself in interviews and other off-the-cuff comments > so that her meaning is unclear. I don't think she meant to imply that the clock reflects Molly's > wishes or that Molly wants everyone to be in mortal peril. Doug again: Well, that is a shame.... that I can't trust the meaning of this statement. Throughout the stories we see how emotions are focused and used as source energies for the spells. I would love this statement to mean the same thing. Doug From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 2 12:49:08 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 08:49:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060502124908.2885.qmail@web37010.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151751 Geoff Bannister wrote: I believe that he showed cunning and resourcefulness. I agree that he did not know that the tournament was being manipulated but the fact still is that, outside of Crouch!Moody's machinations, he did actually achieve some results on his own. Let's give a little credit where credit is due. Harry needed a push to get him going but he didn't get the whole thing handed to him on a plate... That is an oversimplification of the events. Catherine now: I agree 100% with Geoff and have this to add. Harry was competing against 3 people who had 3 more years of magical training under their belts. Harry is 14 years old! Of course he's going to take the clue seriously in the 2nd task, because that's what you do at 14. Everything is black and white at that age. And even Harry admitted after the task that of course the safety precautions wouldn't have allowed for the hostages to drown, but under the lake, it was eerie, things were different. And Felur's reaction showed that even an older more mature person could have taken the clue a bit too seriously as well. And of course Harry needed a push to get things going, he didn't want to compete in the first place! And never mind the tournament for proving Harry's cunning and ressourcefulness, the graveyard scene it what really counts. And he was plenty good there, despite being injured and watching a schoolmate be killed in front of him. Personally, I think Harry is a pretty amazing 14 year old boy. He still has growing up to do, but so do all 14 year olds! Catherine --------------------------------- Make Yahoo! Canada your Homepage Yahoo! Canada Homepage [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Tue May 2 12:58:18 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 12:58:18 -0000 Subject: Son of Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151752 Heidi R.: > No, no. This is not another post about how Snape is really Harry's > father My question is this: Is Lucius really Draco's father? Could > it be that Snape is actually the father of Draco Malfoy? houyhnhnm: I've been intrigued by this possibility ever since I read Rowling's comment that Snape didn't have a *daughter*. Why phrase it that way? Why not say that Snape didn't have any *children*? The over-emphasis on the physical similarities between Lucius and Draco could easily be a misdirection. He looks like his mother, too. There is no reason from a genetics standpoint why Snape couldn't be Draco's father. My reason for rejecting this hypothesis is that I would be very surprised to see themes of adultery and bastardy showing up in the Potterverse, where adult sexuality in general is almost non-existant, no one gets divorced, and even the Dark Lord's pitiful mother was properly married to his father at the time she conceived. It's too racy. From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 2 12:57:53 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 08:57:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060502125753.90506.qmail@web37002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151753 a_svirn wrote: > Ha_svirn: Still his score is better than that of Harry. Harry got tips *and* solutions on a silver platter. Cedric got tips but came up with solutions by himself. Catherine now: We don't know that though. We never see how much help Cedric gets because the story is about Harry, not Cedric. Cedric could have friends like Ron and Hermione who can help him figure stuff out too. Cedric got the tip from Moody to open the egg under water, but if the bubblehead charm is something that is tought in Charms in 7th year, how come Hermione didn't find it? We really don't know how much help the others got for the tasks. And there's no canon to prove anything. Catherine --------------------------------- Make free worldwide PC-to-PC calls. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger with Voice [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue May 2 13:05:07 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 13:05:07 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151754 > > Carol responds: > Yes, I mentioned somewhere in my mostly snipped post that both Sanpe > and Dumbledore mention protective spells on Hogwarts even before the > extra precautions taken in HBP, but I don't recall any mention of them > in PoA, only the Dementors guarding the *gates* as opposed to the > doors (which are heavy oak doors that would be hard for a dog to open, > but unless DD is lying, he doesn't know at this point that Black is an > Animagus). And clearly those spells didn't keep Black out, nor did the > ghost/portrait network report him when he climbed the stairs to the > tower. And once he had actually gotten into the school, DD knew he was > on the grounds. Why not take additional precautions then? At *least* > have Mrs. Norris (who can get out of the way of a wizard quite > quickly) keep watch on the doors at night. Or a Sneakoscope that would > go off if unauthorized people entered? > > > And everyone also thinks that it was okay for Lupin to keep the > Marauders' Map because he "knew" that Black wasn't getting in that > way? (Black's actual state of guilt or innocence isn't relevant here; > Lupin thought he was a murderer. If there was a way for Black to get > into the castle other than the front doors and Lupin alone knew about > it, shouldn't Lupin have revealed that information to DD?) > Pippin: Gosh, I've been pointing the finger at Lupin for keeping the map for ages, *of course* he should have turned it in. I don't think you have to be an ESE!Lupin theorist to admit that. As to your larger point, our situation is analogous to Dumbledore's: it's difficult to say what should have been done to beef up the castle's defenses 'cause we don't know how they were being penetrated. Mrs. Norris is only a cat. All she can do is whisk off to tell Filch that students are where they're not supposed to be. A Death Eater would have no qualms about killing her and we know that the killing curse can be performed without a wand. Muggles and wizards were warned to regard Black as lethal. Fudge says that nobody but trained hit wizards would stand a chance against Black if he was cornered -- and you think Dumbledore should have set Mrs. Norris to guard the doors? Do you not like her or something? :) Sneakoscopes aren't foolproof -- a Death Eater would know how to disable or avoid them, as Fake!Moody demonstrated. Lupin says that no Hogwarts students ever found out more about the grounds or the village than the Marauders did. I think he *knew* that there was a way that an animagus could get into the castle undetected; that's why he felt so guilty. Lupin might not ever have wanted to know exactly what it was -- he wasn't an animagus himself so he couldn't have used it. Maybe they found a long lost pet door? There are also four open passages into Hogsmeade that Harry has never investigated because the Twins told him they are known to Filch. Those might not need wands and they might be easier to get into on the Hogsmeade side than the Honeyduke's passage. I speculate: Sirius could have used one of the four passages to get into the castle the first time. Maybe he didn't know that Filch had found out about them, and he got lucky, or maybe he chose Halloween because he knew that Filch and most everyone else would be in the Great Hall. When he was thwarted at Gryffindor Tower, he immediately left the castle through a hypothetical animagus portal, remained on the grounds (probably *not* in the Shrieking Shack which did not show signs of recent use) and entered the castle through the animagus portal again when Crookshanks brought him the passwords. I doubt Dumbledore and Sirius had time to discuss all this before Sirius escaped, and it certainly isn't the sort of thing you'd want to put in an owl. But once Sirius had returned, Dumbledore might have had a little talk with him and learned more about the gaps in the castle's defenses than even Lupin could have told him. Thus he was able to provide increased security in HBP. But as any chess player knows, strengthening your defenses in one place usually means leaving them weaker somewhere else. A blind effort might actually have helped Black. Pippin who always thought the extra secret passages were there just to have a nice magical seven, and is happy to have found a use for them. And who hopes Carol is feeling less lonely now From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 2 13:10:13 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 09:10:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Fleur and Harry's POV In-Reply-To: <3dc.15d106b.31881be2@aol.com> Message-ID: <20060502131013.96308.qmail@web37005.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151755 puduhepa98 at aol.com wrote: So much between her and Bill seems to have happened when we weren't watching. Is this just a matter of being tied to Harry's POV? Nikkalmati Catherine: In GoF right before the 3rd task, when the champions' familie's are allowed a visit, it is mentioned that Fleur was eyeing Bill and didn't seem to mind the long hair and dragon-claw earing (IIRC). So the seed was planted there. And even in HBP, Ron (or Ginny?) mentions that they've known each other for a year or so, so it seems to me that she did the old Veela charm on Bill at the end of GoF, and the poor guy was hooked! :-) Catherine --------------------------------- Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue May 2 14:15:04 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 14:15:04 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060502125753.90506.qmail@web37002.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151756 > Catherine now: > We don't know that though. We never see how much help Cedric gets because the story is about Harry, not Cedric. Cedric could have friends like Ron and Hermione who can help him figure stuff out too. Cedric got the tip from Moody to open the egg under water, but if the bubblehead charm is something that is tought in Charms in 7th year, how come Hermione didn't find it? We really don't know how much help the others got for the tasks. And there's no canon to prove anything. Finwitch: Well, the Bubblehead Charm was widely used in the Trio's 5th year because of the constant smoke-bombing, even by younger students. I assume that it was in a library book, not a regural Charms book. As to why Hermione didn't find it -- Why, someone else (Cedric/another Hufflepuff, probably, or some Slytherins who didn't want Harry to learn it) had checked it out! Finwitch From littleleah at handbag.com Tue May 2 14:18:18 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 14:18:18 -0000 Subject: Son of Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151757 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > I've been intrigued by this possibility ever since I read Rowling's > comment that Snape didn't have a *daughter*. Why phrase it that > way? Why not say that Snape didn't have any *children*? I was intrigued by this too, and the suspicion returned when reading 'Spinners End', and was reinforced by Snape's healing of Draco in 'Sectumsempra', the singing incantation which was somehow reminiscent of Fawkes, and the wiping of blood from Draco's face. > > The over-emphasis on the physical similarities between Lucius and > Draco could easily be a misdirection. He looks like his mother, > too. There is no reason from a genetics standpoint why Snape > couldn't be Draco's father. >From their first introduction, I always found it interesting that Lucius and Narcissa were so physically similar, both pale blonds. I wondered if they were cousins, but this does not appear from the Black Family Tree. This resemblance between all three Malfoys could have the purpose of firmly identifying Lucius as Draco's father in the reader's mind, while providing an explanation should a different paternity be revealed- Draco takes after his mother and any similarity to Lucius is purely coincidental. > My reason for rejecting this hypothesis is that I would be very > surprised to see themes of adultery and bastardy showing up in the > Potterverse, where adult sexuality in general is almost non- >existant, no one gets divorced, and even the Dark Lord's pitiful >mother was properly married to his father at the time she >conceived. It's too racy. That was my first thought too, but on reflection, I think the hypothesis could still stand. There isn't a divorce, but there is a separation, between Tom Riddle snr and Merope. Apart from the adolescent goings-on, there are hints of adult sexuality, eg '"What do you like me to call you when we're alone together?"....Mrs Weasley had turned bright red...he hastily gulped soup, clattering his spoon as loudly as he could against the bowl". While it's not explicit, neither Harry nor the older reader imagine Mollywobbles is a name Arthur uses while playing chess with his wife. For me, the strongest argument is the conversation between DD and Harry in 'The House of Gaunt'. DD explains to Harry that Tom Riddle snr had returned to Little Hangleton without Merope, complaining of being hoodwinked. DD says, '"When they heard what he was saying however, the villagers guessed that Merope had lied to Tom Riddle, pretending that she was going to have his baby, and that he had married her for this reason"'. So, although LV's parents were legally married at the time of his birth, the possibility that they had indulged in pre- marital sex is put before the reader, and since this is not entirely necessary to the plot, I have a suspicion that this will play later in the story. Leah (wondering who deals with sex education at Hogwarts) From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 2 14:26:32 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 14:26:32 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151758 Steve: > Now A_Svrin seems to be making the point that it was the judges who > displayed poor sportsmanship not the contestants. He doesn't agree > with my position, but I still say that the tournement was a test of > character as much as a test of knowledge, and that Harry displayed the > very character the judges were looking for. Consequently, I say the > points were awarded fairly and within the context of the tournement. Magpie: What's so wrong with the other players that Harry needs to be awarded extra points for "character?" a_svirn considered this sort of thing not part of the actual rules of the contest but the slippery way the judges work and I agree. Does Cedric Diggory really lose to Harry Potter in a character contest? He seems like a stand up guy to me. Even after he's dead. Steve: > > To say that Harry never loses, is to say that he is completely unaware > of the nature of his wins. Magpie: No, to say that Harry loses it to say that Harry never loses. Nobody's missed that Harry knows about the help he's gotten. Whether or not Harry ever gloats has nothing to do with noticing that the author never writes a competition where Harry tries and fails. He's a great guy--and he also has the most points as long a he's physically present and awake. Sometimes he temporarily thinks his team might have lost or he might have lost before he wins. Just thinking about this off the top of my head every time I think of a situation where Harry seems to come out the loser, he later isn't. -m From kjones at telus.net Tue May 2 15:01:59 2006 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 08:01:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Son of Snape? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44577467.6090203@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151759 > Leah (wondering who deals with sex education at Hogwarts) KJ writes: I can help you with that question. You could read Severus Snape and the Sex Ed Snafu on Fanfiction.net by Grindylowe. It's a riot. www.fanfiction.net/s/439510/1/ for the answer. KJ From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 2 15:22:00 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 15:22:00 -0000 Subject: Son of Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151760 > houyhnhnm: > My reason for rejecting this hypothesis is that I would be very > surprised to see themes of adultery and bastardy showing up in the > Potterverse, where adult sexuality in general is almost non-existant, > no one gets divorced, and even the Dark Lord's pitiful mother was > properly married to his father at the time she conceived. It's too > racy. Potioncat: I agree. If there was to be something along that line, it would be a very vague sort of reference. Something that wouldn't make Miss Austin blush. I don't see Snape as Draco's father. As a DDM!Snape supporter, I'd think he would have done more to keep Draco out of LV's clutches. Now, that doesn't mean Snape doesn't have (or had) a son. There is a Snape! Son theory that used to pop up from to time. It proposed that Snape had a wife and son who were killed or harmed by LV. In some support of that is Snape's comment to Narcissa in Spinner's End, about LV, "You know as well I do, Narcissa that he does not forgive easily." Good old Florence gets top billing as the potential Mrs. Snape. But I suspect her moment of fame has come and gone. From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue May 2 15:30:46 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 10:30:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: Message-ID: <002801c66dfd$624106a0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 151761 Here is my lonely take on it: if you showed every student what happened to Harry at the Graveyard and said, "you can have all kinds of help and a nice broom and be given extra points in games, but you have to go through that or you can skip having to experience that and not get quite so much help" how many students would choose to be tortured, cruciated, terrorized, humiliated and have people killed in front of them, (only because they are who they are) and the person "came with" in order to get help and extras? I'm thinking mmmm....no one would trade for that? It's just a thought to put this in perspective. kchuplis [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 2 17:21:56 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 17:21:56 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151762 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > > > Catherine now: > > ... if the bubblehead charm is something that is taught in > > Charms in 7th year, how come Hermione didn't find it? We > > really don't know how much help the others got for the tasks. > > And there's no canon to prove anything. > > Finwitch: > > Well, the Bubblehead Charm was widely used in the Trio's 5th > year because of the constant smoke-bombing, even by younger > students. > > I assume that it was in a library book, not a regural Charms > book. As to why Hermione didn't find it -- Why, someone else > ... had checked it out! > > Finwitch > bboyminn: Harry and Hermione looked long and hard in the library for some way to stay underwater for over and hour and live, but they weren't having much luck partly because they didn't know what they were looking for. After the Bubble-Head Charm was demonstrated in the Tri-Wizards tournement, then all the student knew about it and it would have been much easier to find and learn. I suspect in fifth year, a few students looked up the Charm, and when the need arose they taught it to their friends who in turn taught it to their friends and it spread through the school. My point is that it is understandable that more students would know about the charm after it was so effectively demonstrated in the Tournement. Those 'after-the-fact' students would have a much easier time finding and learning that charm because they had seen it demonstrated and knew its name. Harry and Hermione were looking for a needle in a haystack, or more accurately looking for an unknown 'something' in a haystack. That is a much more difficult task. to A_Svirn - "Harry got tips *and* solutions on a silver platter. Cedric got tips but came up with solutions by himself." It's pretty clear we don't agree on this subject in general, but that's OK, it would be a dull conversation if everyone agreed. In fact, if we all agreed, wouldn't the conversation be pretty much over? I do understand what you are saying and the points you are trying to make, but I have to disagree (big surprise) on the idea that Harry got 'solutions on a silver platter'. Yes, he did get help, but we can safely assume the other champions also got help as well. You seem to have already acknowledged that point. Yet, I still see Harry working out his own solutions. He did the flying to get past the dragon. Moody told Cedric how to solve the Egg clue. True we don't know exactly what Moody said, but we do know what Cedric said, and it was vague and indirect. Once Harry was in the bath, with a little help from Myrtle, he worked the clue out himself. That is, he interpreted the meaning of the clue. I absolutely acknowledge that Harry had help, but I can't quite go as far as 'solutions handed to him on a silver plater'. That seems like a gross overstatement. The truth is that, even with help, Harry wins by the skin of his teeth. He hangs on the edge of losing and struggle desperately to get by. In the end, he just barely squeezes out a win, and as I have already said, sometimes he is well aware that his victory is flawed and hollow. He feels he has the technical win but not the moral victory, and therefore feels no victory in his win. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 2 17:41:28 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 17:41:28 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: <20060502085858.36833.qmail@web38314.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151763 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Cassy Ferris wrote: > > Alla quoted Melissa Anelli & JKR: > > > >MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing > > in front of Harry? > > >JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it > > never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, > > therefore, knew that could happen." > > > Cassy: > I'm sorry if this issue was already discussed, I'm new here, but > that is the point I always wondered about: why it never happened > before? LV killed so many families, surely some mother would > stand in front of her child in effort to protect him/her? We > can't assume that Lily's love was of some "higher quality," so > it worked better. Or was it that LV gave Lily a choice wether to > die or not? But why exactly did he do it, wasted his time trying > to convince a defenseless woman to stand aside? > > Cassy > bboyminn: I think you need to look at the very precise and specific circumstance of the events. James like any parent die trying to protect his family, why didn't his love and defense save Harry? Because his actions were general to the events at hand. Lily on the other hand was right there in the room with the option to 'step aside' and live. She chose to literally stand between Voldemort and Harry refusing to give Harry up. The general circumstances of James defending his family has probably played out many times, but the specific circumstances of Lily standing between the child and Voldemort was probably very rare. The Death Eaters were probably very indiscriminant in their killing. When they attacked a family they didn't really care who was killed or when. They likely killed the adult first, and once opposition was eliminated, they killed the children. Or perhaps, they overcame and captured the adults, killed the kids in front of them, then killed the adults. Either way, it doesn't allow for the precise circumstances that occurred with Lily. As to why Voldemort gave Lily a chance to live, I have always speculated that once he stepped into the bedroom, he had his objective in sight (Harry), and that's all he cared about. Lily at that point was an incidental annoyance. He could care less one way or the other about her. She only became a problem when she got between Voldemort and his objective. At that point, in Voldemort's mind, Lily was not a mother defending her child, she was merely an annoying obstical to be gotten rid of; a gross miscalculation on his part. So, in most Death Eater attacks, there is only a general objective; eliminate this family which represents an obstical between me and what I want. When Harry's family was attacked it was with the very specific objective of killing Harry, everything else was simply a roadblock to accomplishing that task. This created the circumstances in which an unarmed Lily was able to stand between Voldemort and Harry. So, it is not the general circumstance of a parent defending a child which most certainly has happened before, but the very precise set of circumstance surrounding Lily's death that invoked the magic that protected Harry. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue May 2 17:44:57 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 12:44:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <65290EFC-FD48-4C71-9A4C-B25F95D3033B@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151764 On May 2, 2006, at 12:21 PM, Steve wrote: > Yes, he did get help, but we can > safely assume the other champions also got help as well. You seem to > have already acknowledged that point. Yet, I still see Harry working > out his own solutions. He did the flying to get past the dragon. Moody > told Cedric how to solve the Egg clue. True we don't know exactly what > Moody said, but we do know what Cedric said, and it was vague and > indirect. Once Harry was in the bath, with a little help from Myrtle, > he worked the clue out himself. That is, he interpreted the meaning of > the clue. kchuplis: And as well, Myrtle tells us that it took Cedric way longer to figure out. So we know that too. Harry sure gets the "good luck" doesn't he :D From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 2 18:32:05 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 18:32:05 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151765 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: a_svirn: > "Harry got tips *and* solutions on a silver platter. Cedric got tips > but came up with solutions by himself." Steve/bboyminn: > It's pretty clear we don't agree on this subject in general, but > that's OK, it would be a dull conversation if everyone agreed. In > fact, if we all agreed, wouldn't the conversation be pretty much over? > > I do understand what you are saying and the points you are trying to > make, but I have to disagree (big surprise) on the idea that Harry got > 'solutions on a silver platter'. Yes, he did get help, but we can > safely assume the other champions also got help as well. Geoff: Most certainly they did. look at the points made in canon: '"Cedric," said Harry, "the first task is dragons." "What?" said Cedric, looking up. "Dragons," said Harry, speaking quickly, in case Professor Flitwick came out to see where Cedric had got to. "They've got four, one for each of us, and we've got to get past them." Cedric stared at him. Harry saw some of the panic he'd been feeling since Saturday night flickering in Cedric's grey eyes. "Are you sure?" Cedric said, in a hushed voice. "Dead sure," said Harry. "I've seen them." "But hoe did you find out? We're not supposed to know..." "Never mind," said Harry quickly - he knew Hagrid would be in trouble if he told the truth. "But i'm not the only one who knows. Fleur and Krum will know by now - Maxime and Karkaroff both saw the dragons too."' (GOF "The First Task" p.298 UK edition) ':I didn't cheat," said Harry sharply. "It was - asort of accident I found out." Moody grinned. "I wasn't accusing you, laddie. I've been telling Dumbledore from the start, he can be as high-minded as he likes, but you can bet old Karkaroff and Maxime won't be. They'll have told their champions everything they can. They want to win. They want to beat Dumbledore, They'd like to prove he's only human."' (ibid. p.301) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 19:31:21 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 19:31:21 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151766 Geoff wrote: > He took an independent decision to save Gabrielle as well as Ron; OK, you may say that the danger was percieved rather than real but Harry didn't see it in that light. > I believe that he showed cunning and resourcefulness. I agree that he did not know that the tournament was being manipulated but the fact still is that, outside of Crouch!Moody's machinations, he did actually achieve some results on his own. Let's give a little credit > where credit is due. > > Harry needed a push to get him going but he didn't get the whole thing handed to him on a plate... That is an oversimplification of the events. > Carol responds: I'm not sure where I stand in this debate or how this point relates to the original question of sportsmanship, but Harry not only needed help on the egg clue but never did figure out a way to prevent himself from drowning in the Second Task. It was only through Crouch!Moody's staging or feigning a conversation with McGonagall about gillyweed and making sure that Dobby overheard it (after his original plan of lending the book on magical water plants to Neville failed) that Harry knew to take gillyweed and only Dobby's stealing the plant from Snape's "stores" that made it available to him just minutes before the task began. If it weren't for Crouch!Moody's manipulations and Dobby's eagerness to serve Harry and help his save his "Weezy," Harry wouldn't have had the opportunity for heroism and resourcefulness (or whatever) in the task itself. In contrast, both Cedric and Fleur performed the Bubblehead Charm on themselves and Viktor a half-shark, half-human self-transfiguration. Even if they didn't come up with these solutions on their own (and we have no canon evidence that they didn't), they did at least perform the necessary spells themselves, and in Viktor's case, this seems to have been a rather complex and impressive bit of magic. (All Harry has managed as of HBP in terms of self-Transfiguration is turning a single eyebrow yellow. Viktor, admittedly a seventh-year as of GoF, is much more proficient if he can give himself a shark's head, whether the incompleteness of the transfiguration was deliberate or not.) In any case, regardless of what Harry did once he was under the water, all he did to enable himself to compete in the task in the first place and prevent himself from drowning was to chew on and swallow a rubbery plant suggested by a DE in disguise and provided by a house-elf. No resourcefulness on Harry's part is involved. Surely any credit for resourcefulness here belongs partly to Dobby but mostly to Crouch!Moody, who despite being a fanatic and a madman is apparently also a brilliant and gifted wizard like his father. Carol, who hopes she doesn't sound like a fan of Crouch!Moody as she's nothing of the sort From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Tue May 2 19:37:29 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 19:37:29 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151767 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: As to why Voldemort gave Lily a chance to live, I have always speculated that once he stepped into the bedroom, he had his objective in sight (Harry), and that's all he cared about. Lily at that point was an incidental annoyance. He could care less one way or the other about her. Steven1965aaa: I just don't buy that. We've seen, directly, a situation almost exactly like that, with Cedric in the graveyard. There, just like the scenario described above, Voldemort had his objective in sight (Harry), and that's all he cared about. Cedric at that point was an incidental annoyance (and as a 17 year old was presumably less of a threat than Lily). The result? "Kill the spare." No humanity whatsoever, no thought to sparing (pun intended by me, and I believe also by the JKR) "the spare". Why was Lily treated differently? I have no idea of the answer to that question (I know there's of course been a lot of speculation on it, especially involving Snape) but I believe that its a very important question. I guess you could argue that he had Cedric killed because he didn't want a witness around, whereas with Lily he wanted a witness who could tell everyone about what happened. But I see Cedric's killing more as an example of VM's utter lack of humanity and values. From kchuplis at alltel.net Tue May 2 19:44:16 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 14:44:16 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: Message-ID: <002401c66e20$cc1c66a0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 151768 > Carol responds: In any case, regardless of what Harry did once he was under the water, all he did to enable himself to compete in the task in the first place and prevent himself from drowning was to chew on and swallow a rubbery plant suggested by a DE in disguise and provided by a house-elf. No resourcefulness on Harry's part is involved. Surely any credit for resourcefulness here belongs partly to Dobby but mostly to Crouch!Moody, who despite being a fanatic and a madman is apparently also a brilliant and gifted wizard like his father. Carol, who hopes she doesn't sound like a fan of Crouch!Moody as she's nothing of the sort kchuplis: At the risk of repeating myself (bear with me elves. Maybe Yahoomort lost this: Here is my lonely take on it: if you showed every student what happened to Harry at the Graveyard and said, "you can have all kinds of help and a nice broom and be given extra points in games, but you have to go through that or you can skip having to experience that and not get quite so much help" how many students would choose to be tortured, cruciated, terrorized, humiliated and have people killed in front of them, (only because they are who they are) and the person "came with" in order to get help and extras? I'm thinking mmmm....no one would trade for that? It's just a thought to put this in perspective. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rhetorician18 at hotmail.com Tue May 2 20:04:54 2006 From: rhetorician18 at hotmail.com (Rachel Crofut) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 16:04:54 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151769 >Steven1965aaa: >I guess you could argue that he had Cedric killed because he didn't >want a witness around, whereas with Lily he wanted a witness who >could tell everyone about what happened. But I see Cedric's killing >more as an example of VM's utter lack of humanity and values. Rachel here: I don't think VM would necessarily need Lily to tell everyone what happened afterwards. Due to their hiding out I don't think it was a huge secret that VM was after the Potters, and even if it was, the Dark Mark that would potentially be left above the house would leave little doubt as to their culprit. DD for sure would immediately know who had killed them all. I, too, am curious as to why VM offered Lily a chance to live, and I can't wait for book 7 :-). _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From chrusokomos at gmail.com Tue May 2 20:12:57 2006 From: chrusokomos at gmail.com (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 20:12:57 -0000 Subject: Killing James, gracing Lily? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151770 Why Lily had to survive? Hi! Just read a JKR interview (here: http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview.shtml) and am wondering if she gave something new away...but if this topic has already been discussed, please let me know. It seems to me that we learn more about the Avada Kedavra curse; listing our informations: 1) it kills instantly, without marks 2) nothing changes if you die to protect someone 3) if, however, you are given a choice and sacrifice your life for someone, your wish is granted Point 2) was murky to me till this morning: I always wondered why nobody before Lily Potter had died to protect family or friends. But now we know this secret, unknown to LV himself (anyone has read The Neverending Story out there?). Now we know (or did we know it before? is this old news??) that LV wanted to kill James and Harry, but not Lily. Is (wad) DD aware of this? He always said his mother death protected him, but never said why or how. IMO, he didn't know. But the important question is, why James and Harry? Why not Lily? LV doesn't love anyone, so we must know where his interests lay. So ok, he fears the child of the prophecy. And James may well be considered a blood traitor. But Lily is a Muggleborn...why did he need her alive? Sorry for the rambling, I'm trying to find a rational explantion and can't. Hope you do. From spirittalks at gmail.com Tue May 2 20:18:30 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 16:18:30 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's protection for Harry References: Message-ID: <012e01c66e25$94ebbb40$6401a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 151771 Steven1965aaa: I guess you could argue that he had Cedric killed because he didn't want a witness around, whereas with Lily he wanted a witness who could tell everyone about what happened. But I see Cedric's killing more as an example of VM's utter lack of humanity and values. Kim: I find this a very valid arguement. Voldy could not have left Cedric there after his "ceremony" because he would see who the death eaters were. Yes, it's true he was cold, very cold, and horribly callous in his "kill the spare" command and it was the most chilling moment for me in all the books. I have no idea of the extent of his evil and whether he would have killed Lily and Cedric anyway but I do think that he had reasons (valid in his mind) for killing both. Can anyone think of when he might have killed someone other than the one he intended for no other reason than that they were there? I can't think of any right now. If he didn't typically finish off the whole group then Lily might truly have been able to hold some hope that she'd get out of there alive if only she'd step aside. I do agree that Voldemort lacks humanity and values. I just wonder how far he goes. Kim From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 20:25:16 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 20:25:16 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151772 Pippin wrote: > There are also four open passages into Hogsmeade that Harry has never investigated because the Twins told him they are known to Filch. Those might not need wands and they might be easier to get into on the Hogsmeade side than the Honeyduke's passage. > Sirius could have used one of the four passages to get into the castle the first time. Maybe he didn't know that Filch had found out about them, and he got lucky, or maybe he chose Halloween because he knew that Filch and most everyone else would be in the Great Hall. When he was thwarted at Gryffindor Tower, he immediately left the castle through a hypothetical animagus portal, remained on the grounds (probably *not* in the Shrieking Shack which did not show signs of recent use) and entered the castle through the animagus portal again when Crookshanks brought him the passwords. > Pippin > who always thought the extra secret passages were there just to have a nice magical seven, and is happy to have found a use for them. And who hopes Carol is feeling less lonely now > Carol responds: Thanks, Pippin. I figured you'd agree with me about Lupin and the Marauder's Map. I'm just astounded that everyone else seems to think that Black just walked in and out the front doors on both occasions. I don't think there's any mysterious "Animagus portal" and I do hope for the story's sake (and Dumbledore's) that Black did use one of the secret passages. Otherwise both they and the Marauder's Map seem almost like red herrings. But JKR never does explain how he got in, and Lupin implies that being an Animagus was all it took to do so, and to me, still, that's just not a sufficient explanation. As for the front doors, I suppose that the ghosts could have watched them in shifts, and Crookshanks could have reported that information to Black. I don't suppose that Harry would have noticed their presence. That being the case, Black would have had to use one of the secret passages (other than the one from the Shrieking Shack, which doesn't link to the school). But the four that Filch knew about would also have been watched, if only by portraits or ghosts, right? And surely they would have reported the emergence of a dog from one of them as an unusual and suspicious event, especially if that dog headed toward Gryffindor tower. (I still don't see how a dog could have sneaked into Honeydukes to use the hump-backed witch passageway, and the remaining passage was already blocked when Harry received the map from the Twins.) I suppose it's possible that neither Filch nor Dumbledore suspected that Black knew about the secret passages and consequently saw no need to watch them, but after the first incident, you'd think they'd have done some rethinking. Elsewhere in the post you state, "we know that the killing curse can be performed without a wand." Can you tell me where you found the canon for that assertion and how it relates to Black (who evidently intended to use a knife)? DD would have known that Black was wandless as his wand would have been taken from him before he went to Azkaban. (Speaking of wands, the DEs who escaped from Azkaban would also have had their wands confiscated and those who are still at large must be making do with stolen, borrowed, or second-hand wands.) Carol, still wondering why no one else (other than Pippin!) considers Black's method of entering Hogwarts in PoA an unsolved mystery worth investigating From chrusokomos at gmail.com Tue May 2 20:26:40 2006 From: chrusokomos at gmail.com (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 20:26:40 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151773 steve wrote I disagree. James had no choice because, as JKR said, LV wanted to kill him. He wanted him dead. So James could not flee, and could not offer his life for a bargain. As we see in the courtyard scene, book 4, and from real life, when we're offered something we already have (in this case, James' life) we give nothing back. It's ours. Lily, on the other hand, was not just standing there: LV wanted her alive. She chose her death, and thence the protection for Harry. Now, as it has been pointed out, why was Lily important? She certainly was useful in some way to LV. Here are my hypothesis: 1. to report what happened - but as it has been said, not probable. 2. to reward someone, or to control someone, or to ransom someone 3. for using in magical rites or potions Did Snape ask to have her? Would DD have done anything to bring her back alive? Did LV think that he could reverse the "vanquishing child" prophecy by forcing her to have another child who could be a "vanquished child" or an "ally child"? And why, why, why we know since Book 1 that Lily was very good in Charms? We have this vital information under our eyes and don't know how to use it! Hate JKR!!!!!!!!! :D From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue May 2 20:33:11 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 13:33:11 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151774 Carol, still wondering why no one else (other than Pippin!) considers Black's method of entering Hogwarts in PoA an unsolved mystery worth investigating Sherry now: Personally, I never thought about it, and even now with all the discussion, it still doesn't seem important at all. My feeling is that JKR didn't worry about how Sirius got in to the castle. It was only important that he did get in. I bet she never thought more about it except in a general way. She seems to be that way about things sometimes, such as being surprised people didn't figure out how Harry got the map back after GOF. I expect that the how of Sirius entering the castle will never be explained, because it isn't important to the rest of the story. and if it is, then we'll find out in the next book. Sherry From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Tue May 2 20:34:46 2006 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 16:34:46 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151775 Carol: >In contrast, both Cedric and Fleur performed the Bubblehead Charm on >themselves and Viktor a half-shark, half-human self-transfiguration. >Even if they didn't come up with these solutions on their own (and we >have no canon evidence that they didn't), they did at least perform >the necessary spells themselves PJ: You're right but we have to remember that they all had 3 extra years of learning under their belts. Also, I believe all of them were raised in wizarding families so they didn't even have that extra hurdle to get over in their first year. Even if he had people holding his nose for him so he wouldn't drown, the fact that he is able to survive all these challenges and do as well as he did is impressive. The only question I had during that particular challenge is why, having been raised and educated by muggles, he didn't conjure or accio a scuba tank to allow him to breathe under water? :-) PJ - who agrees that having Voldemort's attention makes all other "benefits" Harry gets less than desireable. I doubt anyone would trade places with him for the world! From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 18:51:26 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 11:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060502185126.86100.qmail@web61323.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151776 Magpie: No, to say that Harry loses it to say that Harry never loses. Nobody's missed that Harry knows about the help he's gotten. Whether or not Harry ever gloats has nothing to do with noticing that the author never writes a competition where Harry tries and fails. He's a great guy--and he also has the most points as long a he's physically present and awake. Sometimes he temporarily thinks his team might have lost or he might have lost before he wins. Just thinking about this off the top of my head every time I think of a situation where Harry seems to come out the loser, he later isn't. Joe: Wasn't Gryffindor already losing the match in HBP where Ron isn't playing and Harry joins him in the hospital wing? If I remember right they were already losing badly. You can say is was the replacement Keepers fault but the whole team stuffed that one up. So yeah Harry has lost at something. I would also point out that there are some great sports players who are so good they really don't lose at many things. A game here and there yes but they are always in the chase at the end. The whole getting extra points thing is a non-issue in terms of a competition. None of the other combatants or their head masters did anything like a formal challenge that we know of. So then we must assume that adding points is provided for in the framework of the rules. Now if you saying that JKR shouldn't have done it in terms of storyline then that is another thing all together. We also have no idea how much outside assistance Digory, Krum and Fluer had. My own opinion is that the Karkaroff might well have killed to get Krum that cup. Joe SPONSORED LINKS 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! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2?/min or less. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 2 20:56:17 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 20:56:17 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <002801c66dfd$624106a0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151777 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" wrote: > > Here is my lonely take on it: if you showed every student what happened to Harry at the Graveyard and said, "you can have all kinds of help and a nice broom and be given extra points in games, but you have to go through that or you can skip having to experience that and not get quite so much help" how many students would choose to be tortured, cruciated, terrorized, humiliated and have people killed in front of them, (only because they are who they are) and the person "came with" in order to get help and extras? I'm thinking mmmm....no one would trade for that? > > It's just a thought to put this in perspective. Magpie: Since you've give the take twice: what perspective is this supposed to give? Because it sounds just kind of vaguely shaming, like because Harry had a terrible time at the end of GoF and other places, we shouldn't be discussing anything in the tournament leading up to it, or perhaps anything in canon, except to nod and say poor Harry, he deserves every scrap of happiness he can get. The graveyard scene has nothing to do with the definition of sportsmanship, or whether or not giving a student points for "moral fibre" because he mistakenly thought lives were in danger and stopped to save them, fits that term. Or whether the author might have written the hero losing something. As for whether any of those students would choose to still be Harry if they saw what happened in the graveyard? Yes, many of them probably would. Just like millions of kids all over the world read Harry's books and wish they were him. Even without Voldemort the tournament is an excuse to put people in mortal danger; I think we're even told that there are fatalities in its past. Yet it's still something kids are fighting to get into--personal glory and all that. I think anybody who puts their name in that Goblet on purpose is crazy, myself, but if Harry had been a seventh year in GoF he'd have been up there doing it. -m From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue May 2 20:52:02 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 06:52:02 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44585312.7531.1494A8@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 151778 On 2 May 2006 at 16:34, P J wrote: > The only question I had during that particular challenge is why, having been > raised and educated by muggles, he didn't conjure or accio a scuba tank to > allow him to breathe under water? :-) "Ron quite liked the idea of using the Summoning Charm again - Harry had explained about Aqua-Lungs, and Ron couldn't see why Harry shouldn't Summon one from the nearest Muggle town. Hermione squashed this plan by pointing out that, in the unlikely event that Harry managed to learn how to operate an Aqua-Lung within the set limit of an hour, he was sure to be disqualified for breaking the International Code of Wizarding Secrecy - it was too much to hope that no Muggles would spot an Aqua-Lung zooming across the countryside to Hogwarts." (Goblet of Fire, p418). 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 horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 21:06:03 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 21:06:03 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151779 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > There's a bit of eating her cake and having it too, I think, > > within the school competitions. > >>bboyminn: > So, what you are saying is that they are acting exactly like teens > all over the world. > Betsy Hp: Oh, I totally agree that JKR has her kids act like kids, with all the judgmentalism and double-standards that that implies. And we may well get it cleared up in book 7 that the Slytherins have never actually acted in a more evil or underhanded way than any of the other children. But it's almost stated as a matter of course that the Slytherins are low down, rotten cheaters, when in fact, the Gryffindor team acts pretty much the same way the Slytherin team does. (Sort of like Draco's mythical bulling. We never see him actually bully anybody. Certainly no one younger than him. Unlike, say, the twins.) > >>bboyminn: > But Harry is the underdog and he does lose, and, to some extent, he > loses graciously. That's sportsmanship. Betsy Hp: Really?!? When has Harry lost a school competition? My goodness, he even wins an academic contest. Against Hermione. > >>bboyminn: > In GoF, especially with regard to the underwater task under > discussion, Harry is well aware that he lost, and he accepts his > loss. > Betsy Hp: And then all of that good sportsmanship is undercut by the judges turning Harry's loss into a win. There's a saying (I think it's an old one): "Take what you want and pay for it." When it comes to school competitions Harry takes what he wants, and he's never had to pay for it. Harry may *think* he's going to have to pay for it. He may even head out the door thinking the transaction is complete. But someone (usually Dumbledore) comes running out after him with a full refund in hand. That's not sportsmanship. That's connections. Even if Harry didn't seek those connections out. (Actually, Harry *doesn't* seek out the little boosts and extras he gets. They're pretty much all gifted to him. From the best broom in the WW to the special notes from the half-blood Prince.) > >>Magpie: > > Whether or not Harry ever gloats has nothing to do with noticing > that the author never writes a competition where Harry tries and > fails. He's a great guy--and he also has the most points as long a > he's physically present and awake. > Betsy Hp: Exactly. Did anyone really suffer any suspense over whether Harry's quidditch team was going to pull off the big win in HBP? I mean, the entire team could have been out with the bubonic plague, leaving Filch as their only player, flying with help from a giant crane operated by Hagrid, against Victor Krum himself, and Harry *still* would have won somehow. Gosh, even if the points hadn't been enough, Mdm. Hooch would probably have given the game to Harry for having the "moral fiber" to field a team on game day. Dumbledore set a rather unfortunate president in PS/SS, IMO. And Harry's been skating through Hogwarts ever since. > >>kchuplis: > Here is my lonely take on it: if you showed every student what > happened to Harry at the Graveyard and said, "you can have all > kinds of help and a nice broom and be given extra points in games, > but you have to go through that or you can skip having to > experience that and not get quite so much help" how many students > would choose to be tortured, cruciated, terrorized, humiliated and > have people killed in front of them, (only because they are who > they are) and the person "came with" in order to get help and > extras? I'm thinking mmmm....no one would trade for that? Betsy Hp: I think this is exactly JKR's thinking. It's the only explanation that makes sense, IMO. Because Harry is going through so many other rather horrific adventures (especially as the books go along) she makes his school life a breeze. I'm not sure I *agree* with the direction she took. For one, it never gives Harry a chance to really, really shine. To show that his graciousness can stand the real heat of actually taking a loss. We never get, I think, a true demonstration of Harry's moral fiber. Which is too bad, because I think Harry has it, and it'd be great to see it in action. Betsy Hp From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue May 2 21:06:33 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 21:06:33 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060502185126.86100.qmail@web61323.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151780 Steve: > Now A_Svrin seems to be making the point that it was the judges who > displayed poor sportsmanship not the contestants. He doesn't agree > with my position, but I still say that the tournement was a test of > character as much as a test of knowledge, and that Harry displayed the > very character the judges were looking for. Consequently, I say the > points were awarded fairly and within the context of the tournement. Magpie: What's so wrong with the other players that Harry needs to be awarded extra points for "character?" a_svirn considered this sort of thing not part of the actual rules of the contest but the slippery way the judges work and I agree. Does Cedric Diggory really lose to Harry Potter in a character contest? He seems like a stand up guy to me. Even after he's dead. a_svirn: Exactly. Also I don't see how the tournament can possibly be considered as a test of character. (Character in a sense of moral fibre, nobility etc.) You don't have to be a decent person to fight dragons, giant spiders, kelpies and blast-ended screwts. You have to be courageous, resourceful, keep a cool head on your shoulders and know your jinxes and counter-jinxes. I'd say Voldemort himself wouldn't disdain these qualities in an aspiring Death Eater. Steve: I absolutely acknowledge that Harry had help [gracious of you ? a_svirn], but I can't quite go as far as 'solutions handed to him on a silver plater'. That seems like a gross overstatement. a_svirn: Then would you mind providing an example of his finding a solution on his own? I forgot about the Sphinx (thanks Geoff for reminding me), but other than that the whole "thinking part" was done for him by others. Yes, he displayed his Gryffindor courage, his vaunted flying skills, and his proficiency with defensive-offensive spells, but on the whole he failed the "cunning and resourcefulness" section of this test. Which only goes to show, incidentally, how little the tournament reveals about one's character ? for we *know* that Harry can be as cunning and resourceful as any Slytherin. Joe: The whole getting extra points thing is a non-issue in terms of a competition. a_svirn: Really? And here I thought that competition is all about scoring points off your rivals. Joe: None of the other combatants or their head masters did anything like a formal challenge that we know of. So then we must assume that adding points is provided for in the framework of the rules. a_svirn: Naturally. Even cheating is provided for in the framework, as Crouch Jr. so helpfully explained. Besides, what is the point in challenging Dumbledore? They would have had to continue with their tasks in any case. Being magically compelled by the contract, you know. From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Tue May 2 21:37:05 2006 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 17:37:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <44585312.7531.1494A8@drednort.alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151781 Shaun: "Ron quite liked the idea of using the Summoning Charm again - Harry had explained about Aqua-Lungs, and Ron couldn't see why Harry shouldn't Summon one from the nearest Muggle town. Hermione squashed this plan by pointing out that, in the unlikely event that Harry managed to learn how to operate an Aqua-Lung within the set limit of an hour, he was sure to be disqualified for breaking the International Code of Wizarding Secrecy - it was too much to hope that no Muggles would spot an Aqua-Lung zooming across the countryside to Hogwarts." (Goblet of Fire, p418). PJ: Thankyou. I'm not sure how I missed that but it explains it all beautifully. PJ From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 21:53:33 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 21:53:33 -0000 Subject: Child Saviors and realism (was:Re: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151782 > >>Alla: > > > > Children who are going to save the world, do NOT to the best of > > my knowledge exist in RL :)... > > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Training up a child to take a position where she or he may > > have to "save the world" was once a real life endeavor. > > > >>Alla: > Yes, I thought about famous people who did heroic things when I > sent my post too :) > > I am specifically talking about the child, on whose shoulders lies > the fate of the world. Betsy Hp: Me too. Harry is responsible for the British WW. Alexander was responsible for the Greek world. Elizabeth I was responsible for England. All three were raised with an expectation (a hidden one on Harry's part, a hopeful one, I believe, on Elizabeth's part) that they would shoulder the burdens of their worlds as soon as they were able. > >>Alla: > Alexander the Great conquered the world or a lot of the world > anyways, IMO he did not save it. Betsy Hp: Ah, it's the view point that becomes the crux, yes? The Egyptians certainly saw Alexander as their saviour. As did those Greeks whose cities had been conquered by Persia. Bellatrix would probably define Harry as a destroyer of worlds if she wrote the histories. > >>a_svirn: > Elisabeth I of England wasn't even supposed to be a queen let > along to save the world. > Betsy Hp: Yet, she was trained up to be a queen, taught things that ladies of her class and station weren't taught in that day and age. I think someone had their fingers crossed. And it could be argued that she did save England, or at least set it on the path to becoming the country it is today. It's a matter of perspective, I think. Yes, there hasn't been a child given the burden of saving the entire planet. But King David was trained up from boyhood to take King Saul's place. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle taught children with the idea that they'd in turn wisely rule the Greek world. > >>Alla: > > So, while I absolutely agree that there are many real life > children who either started training for hard life ahead early or > did heroic things, I don't think that such children had task of > such magnitude, something so huge and obligatory. > Makes sense? > Betsy Hp: It does, and I'm probably just being argumentative (shocking, I know ) but in the age of stagecraft and hereditary rule, children *were* trained with the idea that they'd at least be responsible for their world. And in the cases of a bad ruler, I think children were looked to as the next hope of various philosophers and teachers. Like Harry, the responsibility wasn't placed on the child's shoulders until they become adults. But also like Harry, most of those children knew what they were being trained for. So the shadow of the responsibility was there. (Actually, the knowledge probably came sooner for them than it did for Harry. Dumbledore expressed some modern sensibilities there. ) Betsy Hp From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue May 2 22:44:43 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 22:44:43 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151783 Carol: > > As for the front doors, I suppose that the ghosts could have watched > them in shifts, and Crookshanks could have reported that information > to Black. I don't suppose that Harry would have noticed their > presence. That being the case, Black would have had to use one of the > secret passages (other than the one from the Shrieking Shack, which > doesn't link to the school). But the four that Filch knew about would > also have been watched, if only by portraits or ghosts, right? And > surely they would have reported the emergence of a dog from one of > them as an unusual and suspicious event, especially if that dog headed > toward Gryffindor tower. (I still don't see how a dog could have > sneaked into Honeydukes to use the hump-backed witch passageway, and > the remaining passage was already blocked when Harry received the map > from the Twins.) I suppose it's possible that neither Filch nor > Dumbledore suspected that Black knew about the secret passages and > consequently saw no need to watch them, but after the first incident, > you'd think they'd have done some rethinking. Pippin: If Crookshanks was working with Black by Halloween, he could have distracted the ghosts or portraits watching the passages or the staff at Honeydukes. Or Sirius could have arranged a diversion -- lobbed in a dungbomb or something, that would seem like the work of mischief-making students. I think, though, that everyone assumed that Black didn't know about the passages because Voldemort had never attacked the school, according to Hagrid in PS/SS, and most people seem to have assumed he would never dare to. According to my theory, Black didn't need to use the passages a second time. Lupin seems emphatic that being an animagus afforded Black some way to enter the school because otherwise why would he have had to struggle with himself all year to convince himself that Black wasn't using it? I have to wonder about the Marauders during their time as Order members, keeping their knowledge of the secret passages secret even after they knew one of their number had gone over to Voldemort. I suppose they were being protective of Lupin, and he, as always, was being protective of himself. Anybody have a more Lupin-friendly theory? Carol: > Elsewhere in the post you state, "we know that the killing curse > can be performed without a wand." Can you tell me where you found the > canon for that assertion and how it relates to Black (who evidently > intended to use a knife)? Pippin: "Then kill him, fool, and be done!" screeched Voldemort Quirrell raised his hand to perform a deadly curse, but Harry, by instinct, reached up and grabbed Quirrell's face-- PS/SS ch 17 If you read the chapter carefully, you'll see that Quirrell doesn't use a wand at all. It doesn't relate to Sirius, but to the capabilities of Death Eaters - Dumbledore would know that Sirius might be deadly whether he had a wand or not. Even after they learned Sirius was using a knife,it didn't mean he wouldn't use a killing curse. As ancient magic is something Voldemort doesn't appear to understand very well, I can see why Dumbledore would rather trust it, both to guard the school and to protect Harry himself, than sentient beings, who have proved to be so vulnerable where Voldemort is concerned. I thought that the ancient magic was put in place by the Founders, not by Dumbledore in OOP. Pippin not sure why theories that make Lupin look bad are less popular than theories that make Sirius look bad -- sour grapes, possibly From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue May 2 22:52:14 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 22:52:14 -0000 Subject: Child Saviors and realism (was:Re: Harry's assumption VS Everyone's assumption) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151784 > > Betsy Hp: > It does, and I'm probably just being argumentative (shocking, I know > ) but in the age of stagecraft and hereditary rule, children > *were* trained with the idea that they'd at least be responsible for > their world. And in the cases of a bad ruler, I think children were > looked to as the next hope of various philosophers and teachers. > Like Harry, the responsibility wasn't placed on the child's > shoulders until they become adults. But also like Harry, most of > those children knew what they were being trained for. So the shadow > of the responsibility was there. (Actually, the knowledge probably > came sooner for them than it did for Harry. Dumbledore expressed > some modern sensibilities there. ) > Pippin: Children in those times never knew when their parents might die and the power would pass to them, at least nominally. Sometimes their regents were wise and caring, but more often royal children became pawns in a power struggle. Some famously never lived to rule in their own right. Dumbledore would have had all that in mind when he chose to keep the prophecy secret and have Harry raised away from the WW. Pippin thinking that Harry at the Dursleys was way better off than the Princes in the Tower, whatever they died of. From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 22:43:00 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 15:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060502224300.61488.qmail@web61322.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151785 Betsy Hp: Oh, I totally agree that JKR has her kids act like kids, with all the judgmentalism and double-standards that that implies. And we may well get it cleared up in book 7 that the Slytherins have never actually acted in a more evil or underhanded way than any of the other children. But it's almost stated as a matter of course that the Slytherins are low down, rotten cheaters, when in fact, the Gryffindor team acts pretty much the same way the Slytherin team does. (Sort of like Draco's mythical bulling. We never see him actually bully anybody. Certainly no one younger than him. Unlike, say, the twins.) Joe: Erm don't we see a great deal of Bullying by Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle. Well at least attempted bullying? Just becuase they are bad at it doens't mean they aren't doing it. As for Quidditch I seem to remember most of the rows in the Gryffindor/ Slytherin Quidditch matches being started by the Slytherins. Not to mention the fact that if the whole school thinks the Slytherins are low down no good dirty cheaters then its more than likely that they are. If all your peers seem to dislike you as the other Houses seem to do then there is probably a good reason for it. I don't think all the other House's are out of step here. I think most of the Slytherins are as advertised. Sometimes the bad guys are really bad guys. Joe From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 00:03:25 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 00:03:25 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151786 Karen" wrote: > > > > Here is my lonely take on it: if you showed every student what > happened to Harry at the Graveyard and said, "you can have all > kinds of help and a nice broom and be given extra points in games, > but you have to go through that or you can skip having to experience > that and not get quite so much help" how many students would choose > to be tortured, cruciated, terrorized, humiliated and have people > killed in front of them, (only because they are who they are) and > the person "came with" in order to get help and extras? I'm thinking > mmmm....no one would trade for that? > > > > It's just a thought to put this in perspective. > > Magpie: > Since you've give the take twice: what perspective is this supposed > to give? Because it sounds just kind of vaguely shaming, like > because Harry had a terrible time at the end of GoF and other > places, we shouldn't be discussing anything in the tournament > leading up to it, or perhaps anything in canon, except to nod and > say poor Harry, he deserves every scrap of happiness he can get. The > graveyard scene has nothing to do with the definition of > sportsmanship, or whether or not giving a student points for "moral > fibre" because he mistakenly thought lives were in danger and > stopped to save them, fits that term. Or whether the author might > have written the hero losing something. Alla: I am not Karen, but I don't see anywhere in what she wrote an implication that we are not supposed to discuss the sportsmanship, etc. IMO of course. Maybe my perspective would be different from what she meant, but I will try. IMO graveyard scene has a great deal to do with the argument whether Harry LOSES any competitions, because Graveyeard scene shows me that despite getting the Cap, Harry in essense the biggest loser after the Tournament, well, no I guess he comes in second after poor Cedric who lost his life. Harry loses his innocence if he had any left yet, he lost the peace of mind, he was horribly tortured, etc. I cannot look at the Triwizard tournament without Graveyeard scene, because in essense as we all know Harry's participation in the tournament was forced in order to make Graveyeard come true. Harry lost as a result of his participation in the tournament and yes, I think what he lost cannot be compared to Victor Crum and Fleur coming in as third and fourth in the Tournament. Magpie: > As for whether any of those students would choose to still be Harry > if they saw what happened in the graveyard? Yes, many of them > probably would. Alla: Can you refer me to relevant canon, please? For the students who know and believe that Harry was tortured because Voldemort was after him and who still want to be Harry? Sure many students want to be famous like him, but those who KNOW how much pain and loss is behind being Harry Potter and STILL want to be him. I am not sure I remember anybody. I don't think that even Ron wants to be Harry in OOP, although not sure on that one, but really Ron was not at the Graveyard. Magpie: Just like millions of kids all over the world read > Harry's books and wish they were him. Alla: I really liked the argument in one of Lexicon essays that kids IDENTIFY with Harry, they already feel that Harry is similar to them in many ways, not that they inspire to be like him. But of course many younger kids want to do magic, live in Potterverse, etc. I do wonder whether even teenagers still feel that way ( have no statistics unfortunately). JMO, Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 00:18:39 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 00:18:39 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060502224300.61488.qmail@web61322.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151787 > Joe: > Erm don't we see a great deal of Bullying by Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle. Well at least attempted bullying? Just because they are bad at it doens't mean they aren't doing it. Alla: Sure we do. Neville comes to mind of the top of my head right away. > Joe: > As for Quidditch I seem to remember most of the rows in the Gryffindor/ Slytherin Quidditch matches being started by the Slytherins. Not to mention the fact that if the whole school thinks the Slytherins are low down no good dirty cheaters then its more than likely that they are. If all your peers seem to dislike you as the other Houses seem to do then there is probably a good reason for it. > > I don't think all the other House's are out of step here. I think most of the Slytherins are as advertised. Sometimes the bad guys are really bad guys. Alla: I totally understand why JKR makes Gryffindors win, because just like you I don't think Gryffindors come even CLOSE to the dirty play Slytherins show. So, if JKR wants to make nicer guys win, even if this is not how it works in real sports, I am totally for it. But here is what I am wondering. I wonder if the unhappiness with JKR never letting Harry lose in the school competitions ( and I absolutely acknowledge everybody's absolute right to be unhappy about any topic raised in the books obviously. I am sure not shy of voicing my displeasure when I feel like it :)), would still be there if Slytherins were winning all the time? Is the argument goes to JKR displaying more fairness in school competition or to JKR simply letting Slytherins win those competitions? As I said, I think Harry loses a lot,where it really counts. Maybe the message is that school competitions are not really that significant on the big scale of things? Maybe there is a reason why Hermione whom JKR loves so much does not like flying and JKR does not like to write about Quidditch? I view Harry wins as JKR giving him a break( and yes, I guess at least scrap of happiness) before she makes him lose another loved one or being possessed or tortured again. She cannot make him to have it easy on the grand scale of things ( remember "I know what is coming for Harry"), so she makes it easier for him at least in school competitions. Funnily though, I don't get an impression that it is easy for him and despite him often winning eventually, I am not sure every time whether he will win or not. JMO, Alla From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 2 18:57:01 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 11:57:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <65290EFC-FD48-4C71-9A4C-B25F95D3033B@alltel.net> Message-ID: <20060502185701.84031.qmail@web61321.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151788 kchuplis: And as well, Myrtle tells us that it took Cedric way longer to figure out. So we know that too. Harry sure gets the "good luck" doesn't he :D Joe: Sure he does, he's the hero. It would be a pretty bad book if the hero didn't get the breaks. Nobody(okay very few) people want to read seven books about Neville losing the passwords and melting cauldrons. People want to see Harry get the breaks thats why nobody is rooting for Voldemort. Joe From puduhepa98 at aol.com Wed May 3 00:22:46 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 20:22:46 EDT Subject: Dumbledore's Portrait Message-ID: <3d6.177d717.318951d6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151789 >Leonard: > I think in general, one can certainly have magical > portraits of oneself without being dead. Someone will > have to check this, but Gilderoy Lockhart would be my > guess as a canonical mention of a living, portraited > person if there is one. >houyhnhnm: > But why should there be any reason a living person >could not be the subject of a painting as well? In fact, wouldn't the >subject have to be living at the time the painting was created, >whether by magic or by someone wielding a brush? >At any rate, there is another example. Sirius thought the reason his >mother's portrait would not come down was because she put a permanent >sticking charm on it. So she must have been alive not only when the >portrait was created, but also when it was hung. Leonard: > I personally think the portrait is evidence only for > Dumbledore no longer being Headmaster of Hogwarts. > He's not necessarily dead. Nikkalmati: Certainly, DD could have had a portrait of himself prepared while he was alive and it would make sense for him to do so. I don't think that the portrait "magically" hung itself in the headmaster's office. Probably, Filtch put it up as part of the funeral preparations. Therefore, the existence of the portrait does not prove anything. The key factor is that the portrait has not yet begun to behave like the other portraits. When it does, I will be more inclined to take its presence as an indication the headmaster is gone. Nikkalmati >houyhnhnm: >Now I am starting to wonder. Perhaps it is necessary for the readers >to be as convinced as Harry that DD is gone, to feel as alone as Harry >does, so that we will be able to empathize with him as he completes >the next stage of his journey. >Harry will defeat Voldemort without Dumbledore, but DD may be revealed >to be alive. What purpose would it serve to have DD still be alive? >It would exonerate Snape in a way that could be accepted by all >readers, and while I'm not certain about whether or not Dumbledore is >alive, I am absolutely certain that he was not treacherously murdered >by Snape. , Nikkalmati: Yes, Harry has to go on alone or with his close friends to fulfill the pattern of PS/CS, the COS, GOF and the motif of the "hero's quest", so DD had to be removed for purposes of the plot. I don't believe DD will come back just to exonerate SS, because that would be too easy. JKR wants part of Harry's journey to be a struggle to understand SS's role in the struggle against LV. However, DD can return at the end without taking part in the quest or he could have engineered his own disappearance, not to abandon Harry, but 1. to give credibility to SS with LV; 2. to lure LV out of hiding; 3 to give himself free rein in the hunt for and destruction of the horcruxes or all of the above. In the latter case, DD has to conceal his existence from Harry (again!) because Harry is surrounded by possible spies and Harry himself cannot for sure conceal anything he knows from LV. Nikkalmati (not sure if DD is alive, but thinking that phoenix rising from the flames and other issues raised here in the list must mean something) :>). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed May 3 00:28:55 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 19:28:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6DE4C34E-054B-48C5-A92D-681D38830AC2@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151790 On May 2, 2006, at 3:56 PM, sistermagpie wrote: > > > Magpie: > Since you've give the take twice: what perspective is this supposed > to give? Because it sounds just kind of vaguely shaming, like > because Harry had a terrible time at the end of GoF and other > places, we shouldn't be discussing anything in the tournament > leading up to it, or perhaps anything in canon, except to nod and > say poor Harry, he deserves every scrap of happiness he can get. kchuplis: No, no, of course we should discuss it. We are discussing it. Just merely pointing out another point of view. And since we know that the folks involved in judging have probably even a better idea of what Harry's life is they have a different point of view. Just want to give a new direction of thought. Maybe it does sound kind of vaguely shaming. Maybe it should. I mean, lots of other posts sound outright damning. Maybe Fudge and DD et al. have something to be a little ashamed about when it comes to Harry. magpie: > The > graveyard scene has nothing to do with the definition of > sportsmanship, or whether or not giving a student points for "moral > fibre" because he mistakenly thought lives were in danger and > stopped to save them, fits that term. Or whether the author might > have written the hero losing something. kchuplis: Well, no, the graveyard scene however exemplifies just why some people might feel Harry deserves some slack though. In reference to the lake task, the fact is, no other participant DID feel the overwhelming compulsion to save or to fear. Harry "fears" a lot really for safety, for his own, for others. Harry has a lot of reason TO fear. He's had plenty of "fear" experience. Even if Harry doesn't know the prophecy yet, I'd say his previous encounters and experience make it clear that anything can turn into "a bad day" pretty durned quick when he is involved in it. He has good reason to think something might go really wrong in the tournament since he didn't enter it and it's been made clear that there seems to be an ulterior motive. Given experience, there is no reason for Harry to think it's so that he can be school champion and cart around a trophy. To me, there is a difference of punishing someone because someone else did something good, or rewarding what seems like altruistic behaviour. The tasks do pertain to sportsmanship, in one way, because sportsmanship has to do with the participants. Had Harry gloated about the fact he was rewarded that would be bad sportsmanship, but he doesn't. In fact, he seems to feel vaguely guilty through most of the tournament, when he isn't feeling scared and once in a while, he feels good about the fact that he is not yet- well dead-basically. Sportsmanship doesn't pertain to the judges. None of the participants seem like bad sports. A lot of the adults do. Karkaroff in particular. And at least one judge has plenty of reason to feel guilty over Harry, as we well know now. So, in *that* respect, no, the awarding of extra points for moral fiber really has nothing to with sportsmanship. Harry's (and the others) acceptance of that does, but none of them seem to behave badly over it. > > As for whether any of those students would choose to still be Harry > if they saw what happened in the graveyard? Yes, many of them > probably would. Just like millions of kids all over the world read > Harry's books and wish they were him. kchuplis: Now see, here's the rub. A lot of kids think blowing things up would be fun too. Or driving a hundred miles an hour. Or drinking until they are sick. Or that being skinny will solve their problems. Only when it comes to the actuality they usually find they are wrong. I doubt that Hogwart's students would really want to be Harry. It's very comfy *reading* about Harry. The students at Hogwart's are a separate case yet from readers. They are in Harry's reality. Most grew up seeing magic put right (and there are even a few who personally know that magic can very easily kill or maim - Can we say Luna and Neville?), BUT even they are so petrified of LV that they won't say Voldemort's name. They are that scared, in THEIR reality, of what that means they don't want to think about him. So, no, I really don't think that if you showed them what happened in the graveyard they would want to be Harry. And I don't think any of them can identify with any of the students in the tournament. That becomes a separate club the minute they each faced their first dragon. What they thought they knew it would be like and what they found out it was like is again defined for them, but not the other students. Certainly, none of them would want to be Harry after the graveyard. We've gotten very comfy re-reading that scene. But try to remember the first time when it was the unknown for us. It was shocking. Instead of ending up surrounded by school friends, they arrive in a completely unknown, dark nasty place; (WE even have the advantage of a bit of orientation because we have the benefit of reading the first chapter. Harry and Cedric only know that they don't have any back up. I doubt either really believe sending up some red sparks will get them out of this.) how disorienting it must have been. Nearly immediately, Cedric, a "good guy" and totally out of his element was ruthlessly murdered. At the same time, Harry is rendered in such pain that he retches. This is the first time we have seen that level of pain from him. He is then subjected to, basically total, blind terror and pain over and over, along with humiliation and the utter belief that he is going to die. Seeing LV come back and reunite with his death eaters? Icing on the nasty poison cake. There is no seeing the other hundred pages that are in OUR hands; for Harry this is the end of the line. I guess my point is, placed in that reality, I doubt any Hogwart's student would begrudge Harry whatever he gets. The fact that they do begrudge Harry is because - they *didn't* - see what happened in the graveyard and hearing about various rumors regarding Harry is not at all the same thing as knowing, just as reading about the fictional characters is not "knowing". magpie: > Even without Voldemort the > tournament is an excuse to put people in mortal danger; I think > we're even told that there are fatalities in its past. Yet it's > still something kids are fighting to get into--personal glory and > all that. kchuplis: Yes, lots of kids think war is glorious too. Knowing that you *could* get killed (and the folks running the tri-wizard merely kind of brush past all that and say they think they have it fixed....mostly) and being in a situation where you *know* you could be killed (as the participants start to realize when they start the tournament) or that you *will* be killed (as Harry believes in the graveyard) are two different things. magpie: > I think anybody who puts their name in that Goblet on > purpose is crazy, myself, but if Harry had been a seventh year in > GoF he'd have been up there doing it. kchuplis: Maybe, but that doesn't speak to what actually happened. As a fourteen year old, he had only a few giddy fantasy thoughts about it (which is probably about what even the seventh years have about this contest - vague fantasy thoughts of glory) and even then, decided that might not be for him, but got pushed into it anyway. For me, GoF was kind of all about what the difference is between "kind of knowing" and "knowing" for Harry (and probably for Cedric, but he didn't get to be aware of the "knowing" part a whole lot because he was killed.) Betsy Hp: I think this is exactly JKR's thinking. It's the only explanation that makes sense, IMO. Because Harry is going through so many other rather horrific adventures (especially as the books go along) she makes his school life a breeze. kchuplis: It's probably also DD's thinking. I mean, he does know just what he is hiding from Harry, what he did in regards to Harry and knowing it was probably the best thing for the wizarding world doesn't make it the nicest thing, so you know, we have to look at that too. I'm also not sure I would call what Harry has gone through at school "a breeze" either, no matter what help he has received. In that way, JKR failed him in order to keep the "entertaining" aspect of the books. It isn't a breeze to be stared at, sniggered at, routinely turned upon, chosen as THE whipping boy for potions class. Sure, he's a hero on the quidditch field and Colin really likes him, but most of the kids don't seem to treat him "specially". They like it when they get to share in the glory of his winning house points, or a quidditch match or whatever, but they don't seem to hesitate in "casting him out", as it were, when they think he is the heir of Sytherin or when he gets entered into the tournament (and various other times that we kind find) in other words, when Harry doesn't do something *for them*. BetsyHP: I'm not sure I *agree* with the direction she took. For one, it never gives Harry a chance to really, really shine. To show that his graciousness can stand the real heat of actually taking a loss. We never get, I think, a true demonstration of Harry's moral fiber. Which is too bad, because I think Harry has it, and it'd be great to see it in action. kchuplis: Soooooo how much more does Harry have to do to show real moral fiber? He rejects evil. He staunchly stands by friends that no one else seems to like (Hagrid, Hermione). He (correctly or incorrectly) sacrifices his chances at the tournament (whether he had help or not) when he chooses to stay and make sure the others are gotten out of the lake (remember, Harry did not expect any kind of reward for this, that I can tell, and even Cedric got 47 points, even though he was outside the time limits because of his good use of the bubble head charm - we don't know where he learned this charm); he went after Ginny in CoS, there are numerous times when Harry does "the right thing". I guess I don't know just what he is supposed to do to show his character in a truer light. I know that I've seen it in action many times throughout the entire series. What more does he need to do? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 00:45:51 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 00:45:51 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151791 Chrustoxos wrote: > James had no choice because, as JKR said, LV wanted to > kill him. He wanted him dead. So James could not flee, and could not > offer his life for a bargain. As we see in the courtyard scene, book > 4, and from real life, when we're offered something we already have > (in this case, James' life) we give nothing back. It's ours. > > Lily, on the other hand, was not just standing there: LV wanted her > alive. She chose her death, and thence the protection for Harry. Carol responds: But do we really have any evidence that LV wanted Lily alive? (Yes, I've read the interview in which JKR picks up the questioner's word "offers" and concedes that LV "offered" to let Lily live.) What we have, IMO, is evidence that he wanted her to get out of his way: "Stand aside, silly girl!" (He says much the same to Teen!Hagrid when Hagrid tries to protect Aragog.) Essentially, as far as I can tell, that's the extent of his "offer." ("Get out of the way and let me do what I came to do and I won't kill you.") James, as we know, received no such offer. He was armed and ready to put up a fight; therefore he "had" to die. (LV was not going to tell someone who was holding out a wand and ready to hex him to "stand aside." that would be both futile and stupid.) Lily, as far as we can determine, was unarmed and certainly *didn't* put up a fight (except for blocking LV's path), and she offered her life for Harry's, so in a sense, unlike James (who chose to fight but didn't offer his life in exchange for Harry's), she *chose* to die. And, unlikely as it would be for any mother in her position to make such such a choice, she *could* have stood aside and let LV kill Harry, in which case, according to JKR, she would have lived, presumably because LV would have accomplished his objective. (Survivor!Lily, unarmed, guilt-ridden, and distraught, would not have been worth killing in his view. He would have been quite happy, IMO, to let her suffer.) It is, of course, possible that Voldemort had some ulterior motive for sparing her (in which case he violated his own interest by killing her, a very unVoldemortish thing to do), but I see no need for such a motive. She has a chance to move; she doesn't take it; he kills her. But IMO, Voldemort's motive doesn't really matter. What I want to know is how her sacrifice differs from that of any other WW parent who dies protecting his or her child (without actually fighting, as James did, because fighting apparently necessitates that parent's death in the mind of LV or a DE). Certainly, parents protecting their children could not in itself be a rare occurrence in the WW any more than it is in the RL, but according to JKR, the specific circumstances of Lily's sacrifice had never happened before. So the problem (for me) becomes how her sacrifice differs from that of any mother in the same situation, regardless of the would-be murderer's motive. I'm guessing that either 1) LV and the DEs generally came after adults, killing children only if they got in the way or caused trouble by trying to fight alongside their parents, in which case there would be either no need or no opportunity for a parent to step unarmed in front of a child (at least not with any chance of survival) or 2) In those rare instances when LV and the DEs specifically intended to kill children (and why would they do so, if no Prophecy was involved, except possibly for sadistic pleasure?), the parents generally either fought back as James did or used Side-Along Apparition to get the children out of harm's way, as James seems to have suggested to Lily ("Take Harry and run!"), instead of offering their lives for their child's, as Lily did. *Something* makes her sacrifice unique. Somehow, against what seems to be common sense and human nature and the normal state of affairs (i.e., any mother except the fortunately childless Bellatrix Lestrange would have done what Lily did), Lily's specific action had never occurred before. Is it *just* the fact that she stood in LV's way and refused his "offer" (more like an order) to "stand aside," and the ancient magic worked simply because she could have because she could have chosen to obey him and lived but chose not to do so? Or is her offer to trade her life for Harry's ("Kill me instead!") what's really important? Or, as others on this list have suggested, does Voldemort's violation of this "agreement" (by trying to kill Harry when he's already accepted Lily's death as a substitute for Harry's) set off a magical reaction, the ancient magic, as a consequence of attempting to violate an inviolable magical contract (one life for another)? Carol, who has no answers but thinks that Voldemort's motives are less important than whatever activated the ancient magic From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed May 3 01:35:56 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 01:35:56 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151792 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > *Something* makes her sacrifice unique. Somehow, against what seems to be common sense and human nature and the normal state of affairs (i.e., any mother except the fortunately childless Bellatrix Lestrange would have done what Lily did), Lily's specific action had never occurred before. Is it *just* the fact that she stood in LV's way and refused his "offer" (more like an order) to "stand aside," and the ancient magic worked simply because she could have because she could have chosen to obey him and lived but chose not to do so? Or is her offer to trade her life for Harry's ("Kill me instead!") what's really important? Or, as others on this list have suggested, does Voldemort's violation of this "agreement" (by trying to kill Harry when he's already accepted Lily's death as a substitute for Harry's) set off a magical reaction, the ancient magic, as a consequence of attempting to violate an inviolable magical contract (one life for another)? > Carol, who has no answers but thinks that Voldemort's motives are less important than whatever activated the ancient magic Tonks: I agree with Carol that LV's motives are probably not that important. Let us look at the basic facts again: What we know: 1. Lily was given a choice and JKR said that Lily had time to think about it so that is was clearly a free choice. 2. Lily did not know what the effect would be. So we can, I assume, rule out any ideas that she picked up by working in the Dept. of Mysteries. Unless there was a theory that had never been tested, but I think this adds a dimension that is not necessary to the story. JKR said Lily didn't know, so we IMO have to go with that. 3. JKR implies that there is a small detail that she has not told us yet. It sounds like 90% of what happened was because Lily had a choice and made a clear decision to give her life. What we need to figure out is the other 10%. This requires thinking outside of the box. I am having a hard time doing that. Perhaps the line of thinking would be to look at the quantum physics of the effect of a higher energy force (Sacrificial Love) on a lower energy (evil/death) one or something. I know nothing about science. Maybe one of our sciences minded folks can help us. I do like the idea of once she gave her life then LV trying to take Harry's triggered some ancient magicical contract that you can't kill someone once their life has been replaced by a willing victim. This idea I think has some implications or tie in to the whole "life debt" concept. Perhaps the "life debt" is also some part of an ancient magical contact??? Perhaps if we could fully understand the 'life debt" we could figure out our missing 10%. Tonks_op From celizwh at intergate.com Wed May 3 02:10:54 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 02:10:54 -0000 Subject: Son of Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151793 Potioncat: > I don't see Snape as Draco's father. As a DDM!Snape > supporter, I'd think he would have done more to keep > Draco out of LV's clutches. [...] houyhnhnm: There's that and there's the rather obvious point I should have thought of earlier, that it would be very strange for Narcissa to appeal to Snape as "Draco's favorite teacher" if he's actually her babydaddy. Potioncat: > "You know as well I do, Narcissa that he does > not forgive easily." houyhnhnm: They've probably all been crucioed at one time or another. From templerichmond at earthlink.net Tue May 2 21:36:46 2006 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (M. Temple Richmond) Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 21:36:46 -0000 Subject: Fleur and Harry's POV In-Reply-To: <20060502131013.96308.qmail@web37005.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151794 Nikkalmati: So much between her and Bill seems > to have happened when we weren't watching. Is this just a matter of being > tied to Harry's POV? > > Catherine: > In GoF right before the 3rd task, when the champions' familie's are allowed a visit, it is mentioned that Fleur was eyeing Bill and didn't seem to mind the long hair and dragon-claw earing (IIRC). So the seed was planted there. And even in HBP, Ron (or Ginny?) mentions that they've known each other for a year or so, so it seems to me that she did the old Veela charm on Bill at the end of GoF, and the poor guy was hooked! :-) > MTR: Catherine and Nikkalmati, this is the way I understood it as well. I thought JKR handled it sufficiently. She made the implication and then followed up in the next book. From a technical perspective in regard to writing, I think she is well within her rights as a fictionalist to manage the transition this way. She only wants the Fleur and Bill story as a side plot, so brief allusions to the main happenings are appropriate. And then when this couple comes front and center, she plays it correctly at that time, easily and seamlessly integrating the two into the long standing cast of characters. JKR is a fine craftswoman. MTR From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 02:49:01 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 02:49:01 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter / Bad Slytherins In-Reply-To: <6DE4C34E-054B-48C5-A92D-681D38830AC2@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151795 > >>Joe: > Erm don't we see a great deal of Bullying by Malfoy, Crabbe and > Goyle. Well at least attempted bullying? Just because they are bad > at it doens't mean they aren't doing it. > >>Alla: > Sure we do. Neville comes to mind of the top of my head right away. Betsy Hp: Actually, we don't. The reason Neville springs to mind is that he's the only person we see bullied by Draco. And Neville is a peer. Meanwhile, the twins hiss newly sorted Slytherins. (Nice welcome to Hogwarts, by the way. Make sure the new Slytherins realize they're the red-headed stepchildren of the Hogwarts world.) > >>Joe: > As for Quidditch I seem to remember most of the rows in the > Gryffindor/Slytherin Quidditch matches being started by the > Slytherins. Betsy Hp: Um, that was my point actually. The Gryffindors and the Slytherins behave about the same. They trash talk, they play hard and dirty. The twins spy on the Slytherins while at the same time saying that the Slytherins will be rotten and spy on the Gryffindors. Neither team cover themselves in glory, IMO. But I doubt that's the point of quidditich. Any sport that encourages its players to hit other players with iron balls can hardly claim it teaches clean playing. > >>Joe: > Not to mention the fact that if the whole school thinks the > Slytherins are low down no good dirty cheaters then its more than > likely that they are. If all your peers seem to dislike you as the > other Houses seem to do then there is probably a good reason for > it. Betsy Hp: Heh. Yeah. Always best to listen to the mob, yes? This is exactly why I think that if Hagrid is right, if all members of Slytherins are bad (except for the ones that pray really, really hard and change to Gryffindor colors) than JKR is supporting bigotry. Because I'm quite sure the Nazis made similar arguments. So many stories about underhanded, greedy, grasping Jews can't *possibly* be built on nothing, right? It just sends alarm bells off in my head. Evilness determined at the age of eleven just doesn't strike me as right, somehow. > >>kchuplis: > > To me, there is a difference of punishing someone because someone > else did something good, or rewarding what seems like altruistic > behaviour. The tasks do pertain to sportsmanship, in one way, > because sportsmanship has to do with the participants. Had Harry > gloated about the fact he was rewarded that would be bad > sportsmanship, but he doesn't. In fact, he seems to feel vaguely > guilty through most of the tournament... > Betsy Hp: Because Harry is getting a massive amount of help compared to the other Champions. He should feel a bit guilty. It speaks well of him that he does feel guilty. That he doesn't like Bagman giving him undeserved high scores, that he's not totally comfortable with Fake!Moody's little nudges. Harry *does* have good instincts. They just get undermined by Fake!Moody, who specifically works around Harry's guilt because he also recognizes that Harry is uncomfortable with all the help. > >>kchuplis: > Sportsmanship doesn't pertain to the judges. None of the > participants seem like bad sports. A lot of the adults do. > Karkaroff in particular. > Betsy Hp: Oh, I think Bagman is the worst of the judges. He's actually trying to throw the game to make a profit. Doesn't get much worse than that. But yeah, it's definitely the judges that make sure these games have nothing to do with sportsmanship. The Champions try to be good sportsman, and the judges make sure they don't have the chance. > >>Betsy Hp: > > I think this is exactly JKR's thinking. It's the only > > explanation that makes sense, IMO. Because Harry is going > > through so many other rather horrific adventures (especially as > > the books go along) she makes his school life a breeze. > >>kchuplis: > It's probably also DD's thinking. > Betsy Hp: As JKR's avatar, yes, Dumbledore is the worst at making sure Harry feels as little pain as possible when he makes the difficult choices. And it keeps Harry a child. Hence the disaster of OotP. By the time HBP comes around I don't think Dumbledore does anything to shield Harry from the harsher realities of life. Though JKR does step in and makes sure Harry's team wins at quidditch. Again. > >>kchuplis: > I'm also not sure I would call what Harry has gone through at > school "a breeze" either, no matter what help he has received. In > that way, JKR failed him in order to keep the "entertaining" > aspect of the books. It isn't a breeze to be stared at, sniggered > at, routinely turned upon, chosen as THE whipping boy for potions > class. Betsy Hp: There's a reason Harry sees Hogwarts as his sanctuary, his home. He doesn't really suffer there. The closest he comes is PS/SS when he goes through that massive point loss after the Norbert incident. And Dumbledore provides clean-up at the end of the year so Harry's popularity is restored. And yeah, you're not going to sell the "whipping boy" thing for potions to me. Snape is hard, he ain't that bad, IMO. Not even with Harry. Yes, being pointed at by people in other houses isn't fun. But Harry's core group stays true. And when they don't (in OotP with the rogue Seamus) his best friend is Prefect and not afraid to throw his weight around. > >>kchuplis: > They like it when they get to share in the glory of his winning > house points, or a quidditch match or whatever, but they don't > seem to hesitate in "casting him out", as it were, when they think > he is the heir of Sytherin or when he gets entered into the > tournament (and various other times that we kind find) in other > words, when Harry doesn't do something *for them*. Betsy Hp: See, that's absolutely true. And Harry *always* wins. That's what I mean about him being sheltered. I think he can handle the crowd turning on him when he loses, and I think it would have been nice to see him do it. (Of course, the good thing about Harry, his strength, is that he does see that most of the people standing behind him are only doing so because he wins all the time.) > >>kchuplis: > Soooooo how much more does Harry have to do to show real moral > fiber? Betsy Hp: I'd love to see him take something and pay for it. I mean, really, really, pay for it. Not think he's going to pay for it and then have Dumbledore save him. (Ooh, hey! Maybe that'll happen in book 7?) > >>kchuplis: > He rejects evil. Betsy Hp: Evil killed his parents. I'm not sure how this shows moral fiber on Harry's part. I mean, yes it's good to reject evil, but it's not like it was a hard call on Harry's part. > >>kchuplis: > He staunchly stands by friends that no one else seems to like > (Hagrid, Hermione). Betsy Hp: Huh? Who dislikes Hermione? And for that matter, who dislikes Hagrid? > >>kchuplis: > He (correctly or incorrectly) sacrifices his chances at the > tournament (whether he had help or not) when he chooses to stay > and make sure the others are gotten out of the lake (remember, > Harry did not expect any kind of reward for this, that I can > tell... > Betsy Hp: I *know*! He was so close! But then the judges had to go and give him enough points to bump him up to second place. They took his hard choice and made it easy. Ron was upset with him for his choice until he realized it gave Harry the win. It's just too darn easy. It undermines the entire point of the choice Harry made. > >>kchuplis: > I guess I don't know just what he is supposed to do to show > his character in a truer light. I know that I've seen it in > action many times throughout the entire series. What more does he > need to do? Betsy Hp: Harry has shown himself to have good character. But it's never really been tested. He's good, his friends are good, his enemies are bad, and his difficult decisions are never allowed to end in disaster. Even the end of OotP gets explained away by Dumbledore. I'd just like to see how Harry handles being wrong, or how he handles making a difficult (and right) choice that costs him something. Betsy Hp From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 3 02:52:49 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 22:52:49 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: Message-ID: <009601c66e5c$aae2e180$636c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151796 > Alla: > > I am not Karen, but I don't see anywhere in what she wrote an > implication that we are not supposed to discuss the sportsmanship, > etc. IMO of course. > > Maybe my perspective would be different from what she meant, but I > will try. > > IMO graveyard scene has a great deal to do with the argument whether > Harry LOSES any competitions, because Graveyeard scene shows me that > despite getting the Cap, Harry in essense the biggest loser after > the Tournament, well, no I guess he comes in second after poor > Cedric who lost his life. Harry loses his innocence if he had any > left yet, he lost the peace of mind, he was horribly tortured, etc. > > I cannot look at the Triwizard tournament without Graveyeard scene, > because in essense as we all know Harry's participation in the > tournament was forced in order to make Graveyeard come true. > > Harry lost as a result of his participation in the tournament and > yes, I think what he lost cannot be compared to Victor Crum and > Fleur coming in as third and fourth in the Tournament. Magpie: Yes, unfortunately, that's what didn't seem directly relevent. It's not like Harry deserves to have horrible things happen to him because he got help in the tournament or is a Quidditch star. We're talking about the giving of points and the author's decision to write the competitions the way she does. They may have to do with each other in the sense that they keep Harry likeable to readers, or that the author likes to give him lots of triumphs to balance out the tragedies, but I don't think they have to do with each within the context of the thread. > Magpie: >> As for whether any of those students would choose to still be > Harry >> if they saw what happened in the graveyard? Yes, many of them >> probably would. > > Alla: > > Can you refer me to relevant canon, please? Magpie: No, there is no canon on this subject--that's why I said "probably." It just seemed like they would imo. What they would really want would be what you said--the good bits of being Harry Potter--the fame, the glamor, whatever. But I don't think the dark side interferes with that. He's a hero and he faced danger and lived--it's an adventure story. Is it naive? Yes, and if a kid actually found himself in that situation he'd hate it, but he hasn't been. As I said, I wouldn't want anything to do with that crazy tournament, but it seems to be popular amongst wizards. Alla: Is the argument goes to JKR displaying more fairness in school competition or to JKR simply letting Slytherins win those competitions? Magpie: My gut reaction to this is not that it's a question of being fair (whichever team wins wins) It's that I think having Harry always win makes it predictable and that there's times something different might have been different. Specifically, I think having Harry win in OotP was the wrong dramatic choice. And then after Harry was kicked off the team the Quidditch got even more artificial for me. I liked Ron's doing well in the end, but the whole thing started to become too obviously fake to me. In fact, the first time I read it I actually thought Gryffindor came in second for the cup, I think partially because I still think it's better dramatically. JMO, of course. Karen: Sportsmanship doesn't pertain to the judges. None of the participants seem like bad sports. A lot of the adults do. Karkaroff in particular. And at least one judge has plenty of reason to feel guilty over Harry, as we well know now. So, in *that* respect, no, the awarding of extra points for moral fiber really has nothing to with sportsmanship. Harry's (and the others) acceptance of that does, but none of them seem to behave badly over it. Magpie: Yes, I agree. I don't think Harry's behavior is a problem--and I understand balancing out the tragedy with triumph. (I also think that given Harry's life it's understandable he'd think he was facing the real thing with the merpeople.) Dramatically, I think it may actually have been more interesting if there was more variety. If Harry had really fought to win at the tourament, I think I'd find it more tragic when what he wins is that Graveyard chapter. It's a pattern that has started to take me out of the story towards the end of the series. kchuplis: Maybe, but that doesn't speak to what actually happened. As a fourteen year old, he had only a few giddy fantasy thoughts about it (which is probably about what even the seventh years have about this contest - vague fantasy thoughts of glory) and even then, decided that might not be for him, but got pushed into it anyway. Magpie: Exactly--and I agree that this is one of the themes of GoF, the difference between fantasy glory and real glory, and fantasy danger and real danger. But as you said, you don't really know until you've been there, so I do still think that there are probably many kids who'd see the glory of Harry defeating Voldemort before they saw how awful it was. Naturally the kid would assume that, being Harry Potter, he'd have the same success. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 03:24:26 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 03:24:26 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter / Bad Slytherins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151797 > > >>Joe: > > Erm don't we see a great deal of Bullying by Malfoy, Crabbe and > > Goyle. Well at least attempted bullying? Just because they are bad > > at it doens't mean they aren't doing it. > > > >>Alla: > > Sure we do. Neville comes to mind of the top of my head right away. > > Betsy Hp: > Actually, we don't. The reason Neville springs to mind is that he's > the only person we see bullied by Draco. And Neville is a peer. > Meanwhile, the twins hiss newly sorted Slytherins. (Nice welcome to > Hogwarts, by the way. Make sure the new Slytherins realize they're > the red-headed stepchildren of the Hogwarts world.) Alla: Hehe. You may not see it, but I absolutely do. I have to go through books to double check if Draco bullies the younger students, but Neville is NOT the only student Draco bullies in my book. He is also bullying Hermione and Ron and Harry too. So, even if he only bullies his peers, his offense does not become any less offensive in my book. And if he never allows to win in his bullying, well, that again does not make his offenses any less in my book. What matters to me is that he wholeheartedly TRIES. And as we went over that many times in the past, I think Draco deserves every single punch he gets. Why? Because he gets those punches for doing bad things. IMO of course. Hey, maybe those punches will finally lead to him opening his eyes in book 7. > Betsy Hp: > Evilness determined at the age of eleven just doesn't strike me as > right, somehow. Alla: I've always said that while I have no problems whatsoever with JKR maintaining that Gryffindors are right and Slytherins are not in their philosophy, I would also have problems with qualifying eleven year olds as evil in RL, but recently I read some very horrifying stories about very young kids committing horrible crimes, so I am more and more inclined to think that there ARE bad children in real life, and their badness shows up quite early unfortunately. There are reasons why courts sometimes agree to try teenagers as adults. Their crimes are that bad. > Betsy Hp: >> And yeah, you're not going to sell the "whipping boy" thing for > potions to me. Snape is hard, he ain't that bad, IMO. Not even > with Harry. > > Yes, being pointed at by people in other houses isn't fun. But > Harry's core group stays true. And when they don't (in OotP with > the rogue Seamus) his best friend is Prefect and not afraid to throw > his weight around. Alla: Oh, besides the fact that of course I think that Harry's experiences with Snape can account to the level of horrifying, I also have to say that while Harry wins in competitions, I don't buy that his life in Hogwarts is easy AT ALL. Yeah, being pointed at by whole school except few people is not fun, to put it mildly, but it is not just school, whole WW turns on Harry in the beginning of OOP. That is great that two of his dearest friends stay with him, but three against whole WW? Sounds pretty horrible to me. > > >>kchuplis: > > Soooooo how much more does Harry have to do to show real moral > > fiber? > > Betsy Hp: > I'd love to see him take something and pay for it. I mean, really, > really, pay for it. Not think he's going to pay for it and then > have Dumbledore save him. (Ooh, hey! Maybe that'll happen in book > 7?) Alla: He paid for his trip to MoM by losing Sirius. Dumbledore did not save him from losing a loved one. That does not count? > > >>kchuplis: > > He staunchly stands by friends that no one else seems to like > > (Hagrid, Hermione). > > Betsy Hp: > Huh? Who dislikes Hermione? And for that matter, who dislikes > Hagrid? Alla: After Rita Skeeter articles, people do dislike Hermione including Molly. > > Alla: > > IMO graveyard scene has a great deal to do with the argument whether > > Harry LOSES any competitions, because Graveyeard scene shows me that > > despite getting the Cap, Harry in essense the biggest loser after > > the Tournament, well, no I guess he comes in second after poor > > Cedric who lost his life. Harry loses his innocence if he had any > > left yet, he lost the peace of mind, he was horribly tortured, etc. > Magpie: > Yes, unfortunately, that's what didn't seem directly relevent. It's not > like Harry deserves to have horrible things happen to him because he got > help in the tournament or is a Quidditch star. We're talking about the > giving of points and the author's decision to write the competitions the way > she does. They may have to do with each other in the sense that they keep > Harry likeable to readers, or that the author likes to give him lots of > triumphs to balance out the tragedies, but I don't think they have to do > with each within the context of the thread. Alla: I am not sure I follow at all. For Harry Graveyard scene is a direct CONTINUATION of the Triwizard tournament, no? They are connected, since the only reason Fake!Moody helped Harry to get in Tournament was to get him to the Graveyard at some point in time. So, I think that any division of these two events is artificial and it is relevant much more than just to keep Harry likeable. IMO this is Triwizard tournament round four ( or whatever it is) for Harry. Without plan to get Harry to Graveyard, he would have never entered the Tournament at all, so to say that Harry WON the tournament when the "prise" was getting to Graveyard, I just don't see it at all. To me it is clear that Harry lost and big time. JMO, Alla From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Wed May 3 02:04:45 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 02:04:45 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Portrait In-Reply-To: <3d6.177d717.318951d6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151798 > Nikkalmati wrote: > However, DD can return at the end without taking part in the quest or he > could have engineered his own disappearance, not to abandon Harry, but 1. to > give credibility to SS with LV; 2. to lure LV out of hiding; 3 to give > himself free rein in the hunt for and destruction of the horcruxes or all of the > above. In the latter case, DD has to conceal his existence from Harry (again!) > because Harry is surrounded by possible spies and Harry himself cannot for > sure conceal anything he knows from LV. > Najwa Now: So could Dumbledore be all polyjuiced up and acting like someone else, someone perhaps that Harry really doesn't know but might have heard of, like Regulus? I dunno I still don't buy that he's alive, though I think he'll be around somehow or other and that Snape will show that he's not as bad as we all think he is. Najwa From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 03:16:14 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 20:16:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter / Bad Slytherins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503031614.82245.qmail@web61312.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151799 Betsy Hp: Um, that was my point actually. The Gryffindors and the Slytherins behave about the same. They trash talk, they play hard and dirty. The twins spy on the Slytherins while at the same time saying that the Slytherins will be rotten and spy on the Gryffindors. Neither team cover themselves in glory, IMO. But I doubt that's the point of quidditich. Any sport that encourages its players to hit other players with iron balls can hardly claim it teaches clean playing. Joe: I don't think the Gryffindors play dirty. In the books I believe the only time any of them breaks the rules on the pitch is as a response to something the Slytherins did. defending your teammates is something good guys do as a matter of course. I also fail to see how the fact that Quidditch is dangerous takes away from any sportsmanship it might have. Like many sports it has a very paly hard play fair feel to it. Most guys growing up learn that pretty quickly. If you get hit hard has nothing to do with it. Betsy Hp: Heh. Yeah. Always best to listen to the mob, yes? This is exactly why I think that if Hagrid is right, if all members of Slytherins are bad (except for the ones that pray really, really hard and change to Gryffindor colors) than JKR is supporting bigotry. Because I'm quite sure the Nazis made similar arguments. So many stories about underhanded, greedy, grasping Jews can't *possibly* be built on nothing, right? It just sends alarm bells off in my head. Evilness determined at the age of eleven just doesn't strike me as right, somehow. Joe: Sorry but you are a bit off base here. Bigotry is based on nothing, a lack of knowledge. Putting aside the fact that the Sorting Hat "knows" where to put them that still doesn't account for the fact that the people who live with them for years think of them as low down dirty cheating sumbags. The other students know them better than anyone so I would have to give them the benefit of the doubt so as to judge their character. I don't know if you can be evil at eleven but I don't know that you can't either. Of course not all Slytherins are evil but you don't have to be evil to be a low down dirty cheating scumbag. Most of the Slytherins we know by name are crappy people but I don't think we can say anyone of them are evil unless its Draco. Must everyone be Redeemed in HP? Epic tales need good guys. The Gryffindors house imagery alone shows what they are. Epic tales need bad guys. The Slytherin house imagery alone shows what they are. Will every Slytherin be evil? Of course not. Do they suffer hugely by comparison to the Gryffindors? Well we know of one Gryffindor that turned out to be a Deather Eater. How many Slytherins did? The other Houses at Hogwarts know how they have been treated by the Slytherins if they think poorly of them then that would be at least highly damning wouldn't it? Joe From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Wed May 3 03:27:49 2006 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 03:27:49 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151800 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > As to why Voldemort gave Lily a chance to live, I have always > speculated that once he stepped into the bedroom, he had his > objective in sight (Harry), and that's all he cared about. Lily at > that point was an incidental annoyance. He could care less one way > or the other about her. > Doddiemoemoe here: I used to be of the opinion that voldie would let her live due to a deal he made with Snape..... However, now, I'm wondering if Voldemort wanted lily aside because he went to godrics that night to create a horcrux....and what a better way than to make one out of the individual that was destined to destroy you.... It would be in character for voldemort to do this as he tends to defeat his own purposes over and over again.... If this is true then we must ask ourselves if harry is a true horcrux after voldemort took his blood.... DD (who also wonders if after voldemort realized his mistake, made nagini a horcrux?) From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed May 3 03:49:31 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 22:49:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter / Bad Slytherins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6DE8E652-B91A-4DBB-B8AD-2663D6004734@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151801 On May 2, 2006, at 9:49 PM, horridporrid03 wrote: > > Betsy Hp: > Because Harry is getting a massive amount of help compared to the > other Champions. kchuplis: We have no idea what help the other champions did or did not receive except in regards to the dragons. And considering the dragons, we can assume the other champions got plenty of help from their respective HM's (and in Cedric's case possibly from his father). Betsy HP: > He should feel a bit guilty. It speaks well of > him that he does feel guilty. That he doesn't like Bagman giving > him undeserved high scores, that he's not totally comfortable with > Fake!Moody's little nudges. Harry *does* have good instincts. They > just get undermined by Fake!Moody, who specifically works around > Harry's guilt because he also recognizes that Harry is uncomfortable > with all the help. kchuplis: But what exactly is Harry supposed to do to avoid help? Stick his fingers in his ears and say "LALALA I can't hear you!"? This makes no sense to me to damn Harry with faint praise because he feels guilty that people are forcing (yes, forcing) help on him. He does not actively seek out help. At any rate, we know that Karkaroff and Maxime start off giving their champions help by finding the dragons, so we have no reason to believe they are not doing more. So Harry is supposed to just go in and get slaughtered to show "character"? I don't think so. Whether he is the hero or not, he isn't a suicidal fool so not using anything that is given to him is just being some kind of Rule Martyr. > > > Betsy Hp: > Oh, I think Bagman is the worst of the judges. He's actually trying > to throw the game to make a profit. Doesn't get much worse than > that. But yeah, it's definitely the judges that make sure these > games have nothing to do with sportsmanship. The Champions try to > be good sportsman, and the judges make sure they don't have the > chance. kchuplis: The judges behaving badly means the champions don't have an opportunity to show good sportsmanship? I don't get that. The champions all DID show sportsmanship. How were they prevented? Please give an instance of them being bad sports. > > Betsy Hp: > As JKR's avatar, yes, Dumbledore is the worst at making sure Harry > feels as little pain as possible when he makes the difficult > choices. And it keeps Harry a child. Hence the disaster of OotP. > By the time HBP comes around I don't think Dumbledore does anything > to shield Harry from the harsher realities of life. Though JKR does > step in and makes sure Harry's team wins at quidditch. Again. kchuplis: Oh curses. How dare she. > > > Betsy Hp: > There's a reason Harry sees Hogwarts as his sanctuary, his home. He > doesn't really suffer there. The closest he comes is PS/SS when he > goes through that massive point loss after the Norbert incident. > And Dumbledore provides clean-up at the end of the year so Harry's > popularity is restored. kchuplis: What DD did takes nothing away from what Harry and team did. That's not Harry's fault. That is DD's choice. And maybe Harry's popularity is restored but it's whipped away pretty quickly too (although, quite honestly, seeing him in scenes with other students, I don't see him as being overly popular. Can you cite some really supportive evidence (aside from Colin) where Harry is unduly loved and revered by students?) > BetsyHP: > And yeah, you're not going to sell the "whipping boy" thing for > potions to me. Snape is hard, he ain't that bad, IMO. Not even > with Harry. kchuplis: I guess it happens off page that Snape breaks other kids flagons of potion accidentally on purpose and constantly docks points from...oh, well, yeah, Neville. The Boy Who Could Have Been CHosen and The Boy Who was Chosen. I see, that makes Snape just a stern teacher. OK, you won't sell that to me. BetsyHP: > > Yes, being pointed at by people in other houses isn't fun. But > Harry's core group stays true. And when they don't (in OotP with > the rogue Seamus) his best friend is Prefect and not afraid to throw > his weight around. kchuplis: I think Harry is more than pointed at. He is often cut dead. That's a Big Thing with anyone, let alone kids. If people (not just one, but whole departments) you work with, who you always rubbed along well enough with suddenly stop talking to you, avoid you, are seen peeking at you and whispering about you, I'm sure you would feel just peachy about it because you have other real friends. You are a better man than I, Gunga Din. > > > >>kchuplis: > > They like it when they get to share in the glory of his winning > > house points, or a quidditch match or whatever, but they don't > > seem to hesitate in "casting him out", as it were, when they think > > he is the heir of Sytherin or when he gets entered into the > > tournament (and various other times that we kind find) in other > > words, when Harry doesn't do something *for them*. > > Betsy Hp: > See, that's absolutely true. And Harry *always* wins. kchuplis: Oo. Nice swerve. So what? Harry wins at quidditch a lot. And he wins against LV (thank God). How does that make students liking him *only if he is benefitting them* and really turning against him (I mean turning. These kids don't just start ignoring him, they do everything from cutting to out right interrogating and harranging him throughout the series. I guess they don't stone him. That's something anyway.) any easier really? He can know that he has two friends. It doesn't matter half the other kids are half afraid of him and half contemptuous (depending on their mood). Oh, yeeeah. He can take it. It builds character. I forgot. betsy HP: > That's what > I mean about him being sheltered. I think he can handle the crowd > turning on him when he loses, kchuplis: Of course he can. Does that make it more pleasant? A "breeze". No. > and I think it would have been nice to > see him do it. kchuplis: OK, When did we not see him "do it"? He did all the way through CoS. He did it halfway through GoF (til people figured out it might not be the "treat" they thought to be in the tournament), he did it all the way through OoTP. I'm not certain when we *aren't* seeing him handle it. > > > >>kchuplis: > > Soooooo how much more does Harry have to do to show real moral > > fiber? > > Betsy Hp: > I'd love to see him take something and pay for it. I mean, really, > really, pay for it. > Not think he's going to pay for it and then > have Dumbledore save him. (Ooh, hey! Maybe that'll happen in book > 7?) kchuplis: Yeah! Because, you know, being tortured and having people die in front of him and finding out you have to save the freakin' world from this hideous guy who can make you throw up from pain even when he isn't torturing you with a cruciatus curse and having the whole wizarding world think you are insane until you MAKE them see the truth isn't really paying for anything. I'm sorry. I think Harry pays plenty. > > > >>kchuplis: > > He rejects evil. > > Betsy Hp: > Evil killed his parents. I'm not sure how this shows moral fiber on > Harry's part. I mean, yes it's good to reject evil, but it's not > like it was a hard call on Harry's part. kchuplis: It is though. He could have thrown his lot in with say Draco and had a much easier time of it through school. He could have accepted LV's first invitation. Evil IS easier much of the time. I mean, that's a bit of the part of good vs. evil. Usually evil is a bit tempting. Maybe it isn't hard to reject, but that does come with a lot of pain much of the time. > > > >>kchuplis: > > He staunchly stands by friends that no one else seems to like > > (Hagrid, Hermione). > > Betsy Hp: > Huh? Who dislikes Hermione? And for that matter, who dislikes > Hagrid? > kchuplis: Errr. Didn't we just have a billion threads on how Hermione doesn't have any girlfriends supposedly? He made Ron go with him on the troll front after Ron hurt her feelings. Also, I believe he spends most of OoTP calling people to carpet on Hagrid. He defends Hagrid immediately to Draco in SS/PS. He stands by him no matter what. > > > Betsy Hp: > I *know*! He was so close! But then the judges had to go and give > him enough points to bump him up to second place. They took his > hard choice and made it easy. Ron was upset with him for his choice > until he realized it gave Harry the win. It's just too darn easy. > It undermines the entire point of the choice Harry made. > kchuplis: His hard choice? How would his "choice" have been different? He would have gone into the maze last. Oh boy. Bet he would never have gotten to the cup then. Not. It really doesn't affect Harry's choice. What do you mean? > > Betsy Hp: > Harry has shown himself to have good character. But it's never > really been tested. kchuplis: (I can't help it.) Because you know, putting up with torturing and vomit causing pain and chasing basilisks to protect innocent girls and suffering words carved into your hand over and over and having people killed on account of some wierdo hates you and still coming out of it sane isn't really a test. Betsy HP: > He's good, his friends are good, his enemies > are bad, kchuplis: I'd say his enemies are a bit more than "bad". But that's just me. BetsyHP: > and his difficult decisions are never allowed to end in > disaster. kchuplis: Yeah, murder isn't disaster. Nor the death of your godfather, or ... well, yeah. No disasters in Harry's life. > Even the end of OotP gets explained away by Dumbledor > I'd just like to see how Harry handles being wrong, or how he > handles making a difficult (and right) choice that costs him > something. kchuplis: Cause Harry has had such an easy time of it. Speaking out against the Ministry only cost a bit of flesh and blood and world wide (wizarding world wide) humiliation and ridicule (almost a year of it), doesn't cost him anything. Piece o' cake. From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed May 3 03:53:00 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 22:53:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <009601c66e5c$aae2e180$636c400c@Spot> References: <009601c66e5c$aae2e180$636c400c@Spot> Message-ID: <431E6AB4-7072-47CA-BBCD-ADDEF06DF12C@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151802 On May 2, 2006, at 9:52 PM, Magpie wrote: > Magpie: > Exactly--and I agree that this is one of the themes of GoF, the > difference > between fantasy glory and real glory, and fantasy danger and real > danger. > But as you said, you don't really know until you've been there, so > I do > still think that there are probably many kids who'd see the glory > of Harry > defeating Voldemort before they saw how awful it was. Naturally > the kid > would assume that, being Harry Potter, he'd have the same success. > Maybe, if you left out all the torturing and murder stuff. You really believe if you showed or described the graveyard scene to Hogwart's students they'd say "Hey KEWL! I want to do that!"? I think even the dimmest student would see the difference if they knew about the graveyard. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 03:51:55 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 03:51:55 -0000 Subject: The Trial of JKR for XC in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151803 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > J.K. Rowling - God's Smuggler. > > Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury: Allow me to present the case for > the prosecution in the matter of J.K. Rowling and the Use of > Christian Symbolism in the Harry Potter books. I will attempt to > show, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Ms. Rowling has with clear > intent, deliberately and with forethought used symbols and methods > of arranging said symbols to construct hidden clues that she knew > were of specific significance to the Christian community. > > > The Prosecution rests its case and ask that you find Ms. Rowling > guilty as charged. > > Tonks_op > Angie: Wow! While I don't relish the idea of finding JKR "guilty" because it implies she has done something wrong, I think you have made a very compelling case and have pointed out things that I hadn't noticed. It will be interesting to see what JKR says on the issue after the last book is written. I, for one, hope you are right about the symbolism, but if not, it will not lessen my enjoyment of the series any! From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed May 3 04:01:52 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 04:01:52 -0000 Subject: How did Black get into Hogwarts in PoA? (Was: Dumbledore on the Dursleys . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151804 > Carol responds: (I still don't see how a dog could have > sneaked into Honeydukes to use the hump-backed witch passageway, and > the remaining passage was already blocked when Harry received the map > from the Twins.) zgirnius: I'm another believer that Sirius came in through the secret passages, and I consider the Honeydukes passage most likely. How late do you believe Honeydukes remains open in the evening? I would guess it closes before supper. Sirius could enter the village past the Dementors in dog form, and sniff unobtrusively about next to the rubbish bins outside the back entrance to the shop. (Wizards do have them, didn't Moody attack his own, supposedly, the night he was kidnapped?) Once he saw the coast was clear, he could transform and break in using Muggle means (break a cellar window, for example). I also the idea someone else posted about creating a distraction with or without the help of Crookshanks... From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 3 04:06:03 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 00:06:03 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: <009601c66e5c$aae2e180$636c400c@Spot> <431E6AB4-7072-47CA-BBCD-ADDEF06DF12C@alltel.net> Message-ID: <002701c66e66$e5e09ca0$5472400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151805 Karen: > Maybe, if you left out all the torturing and murder stuff. You really > believe if you showed or described the graveyard scene to Hogwart's > students they'd say "Hey KEWL! I want to do that!"? I think even the > dimmest student would see the difference if they knew about the > graveyard. Magpie: You mean like all those kids who see the movie and come out saying, "Hey KEWL! Let's play Harry Potter right now! And see the movie AGAIN! And then read the book!" Funny how heroes in stories get that sort of thing. -m From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 3 04:07:28 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 00:07:28 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter / Bad Slytherins References: Message-ID: <002a01c66e67$18cfb470$5472400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151806 > Alla: > Without plan to get Harry to Graveyard, he would have never entered > the Tournament at all, so to say that Harry WON the tournament when > the "prise" was getting to Graveyard, I just don't see it at all. > > To me it is clear that Harry lost and big time. Magpie: I didn't say he "won" the tournament the way you're using it. Of course he "lost big time" in the end because it was all leading him to Voldemort, but while we're passing time during the school year we're watching him forced to compete in difficult contests and win. Each time there's a contest Rowling has to come up with something interesting to happen, some way for the contest to go down. She sticks to a more limited formula than she might. -m From mariabronte at yahoo.com Wed May 3 04:15:50 2006 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 04:15:50 -0000 Subject: The Trial of JKR for XC in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151807 Tonks, thank you so much for setting all this out in such a clear way. I am one hundred percent with you that JKR intends to reference and re interpret events in the Christian story throughout the series. I don't think everything in HP has a direct equivalent in the Bible (any more than everything in Narnia does), but your reference to the Hogwarts motto and connection of it to C.S Lewis' remarks about 'stealing past watchful dragons' had me grinning from ear to ear. Can't help but wonder if JKR is hoping for a similar thing to what C.S Lewis hoped (and in fact happened) with the Narnia series; HP can be enjoyed as an exciting story, but at the same time indirectly gets readers to think about moral and spiritual issues, which is always best done by myth, story and parable rather than preaching :-) Both Lewis and JKR try to get away from the 'stained glass window' and 'churchy' associations of the Christian story. The tremendous continuing popularity of both series suggests they have been eminently successful. Mari. From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed May 3 04:18:33 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 23:18:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <002701c66e66$e5e09ca0$5472400c@Spot> References: <009601c66e5c$aae2e180$636c400c@Spot> <431E6AB4-7072-47CA-BBCD-ADDEF06DF12C@alltel.net> <002701c66e66$e5e09ca0$5472400c@Spot> Message-ID: <6C902166-60E1-446C-B331-0EAD6CECC519@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151808 On May 2, 2006, at 11:06 PM, Magpie wrote: > Karen: > > Maybe, if you left out all the torturing and murder stuff. You > really > > believe if you showed or described the graveyard scene to Hogwart's > > students they'd say "Hey KEWL! I want to do that!"? I think even the > > dimmest student would see the difference if they knew about the > > graveyard. > > Magpie: > You mean like all those kids who see the movie and come out saying, > "Hey > KEWL! Let's play Harry Potter right now! And see the movie AGAIN! > And then > read the book!" Funny how heroes in stories get that sort of thing. kchuplis: Once again, reading and seeing a movie is a much different thing that showing Hogwart's students that *live in that reality*. I believe that several times I've pointed out that *students at Hogwarts* would not be so excited. They don't know it's just a book. From elfundeb at gmail.com Wed May 3 04:25:09 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 00:25:09 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0605022125m78b4d34j1b85f2c0b7581a55@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151809 Some rambling thoughts on JKR's use of sport and sportsmanship -- Betsy: > Do these books ever give us an example of good > sportsmanship? Well, of course they do. Cedric's a good sport. That's one reason we feel so much anguish when he is killed simply for showing up unexpectedly at Voldemort's little rebirthing party. It establishes him unequivocally as one of the Good Guys. a_svirn: And I agree that there is nothing sportsmanlike about awarding points for "moral fiber". In fact, it's downright ridiculous. Debbie: Especially in a contest that is more like a simulation of warfare, requiring cunning and resourcefulness rather than athletic skill. In a war we wouldn't dream of rejecting espionage as a weapon because it's not sportsmanlike. Cheating is expected, and it is rewarded when successful. OTOH, sport imitates life, and an act of true humanitarianism that may spell defeat for the actor is the stuff that saints are made of. Future generations not only remember saints, they revere them. Perhaps that makes it appropriate to award Harry full marks. (Besides, the task was for the champions to recover what was taken from them. IMO, the critical fact Dumbledore learned in his conference with the merpeople was that Harry was the first to reach the hostages. Harry arguably recovered Ron as soon as he unbound him, so I don't necessarily assume he disobeyed the rules by trying to do more.) Magpie: No, to say that Harry loses it to say that Harry never loses. Nobody's missed that Harry knows about the help he's gotten. Whether or not Harry ever gloats has nothing to do with noticing that the author never writes a competition where Harry tries and fails. He's a great guy--and he also has the most points as long a he's physically present and awake. Sometimes he temporarily thinks his team might have lost or he might have lost before he wins. Debbie: I certainly agree that Harry is ridiculously successful. In fact, I thought it was so overdone in PS/SS and CoS that I might not have read further but for the fact that two years earlier I had babysat a friend's children and read them one chapter of HP at bedtime; the chapter was Grim Defeat, so I knew those victories wouldn't go on forever. But it's worth noting that when Harry does lose it's because he has lost his focus on the task at hand. In PoA he is drawn to the memory that the Dementors dredge up and he loses consciousness because he is seeking to hear his mother's voice and not seeking the Snitch. In OOP he is banned from Quidditch because he is drawn into a fight that has nothing to do with the game. In HBP it is the same thing: he does something foolish and it costs him. There *is* a lesson here -- talent is not enough to win. Betsy Hp: That's a continual problem in the Potterverse, IMO. Like when the twins complain about Slytherin's spying on the Gryffindor practice, because that's just so not done, and then come running back to report on what they found out *while spying on the Slytherin practice*. Or how it's just horrible that the Slytherins have such good brooms, but isn't it great when Harry gets the best broom on the market? There's a bit of eating her cake and having it too, I think, within the school competitions. Debbie: This is, in my view, a much more significant issue than the results of the Second Task, and one which plays out in her portrayal of the Slytherins generally. In fact, if I were discussing whether HP is or is not a children's series (something this list once debated regularly), I would cite her too-clear separation of the Hogwarts world into Good Guys (Gryffindors), Bad Guys (Slytherins), and scenery (Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff). As adults we know that individuals are much more complicated than this, but JKR seems intent to play this aspect of the series like a Road Runner cartoon. And those Twins (don't let me get started on them). They are above the law, but as long as their lawlessness is employed in the service of the Good Guys, anything goes. And Mundungus, that goes for you, too! But in a war, you use all the tools at your disposal, or most of them, at any rate. And the lawless ones can be very effective (not to mention funny) so they are acceptable. However, the leeway granted to the Good Guys to use less than ideal methods does tend to draw attention away from the acts that do demonstrate superior moral fibre. And while in a real-life situation such as WWII we recognize that certain things were necessary to defeat the evil that the Third Reich represented, I'm not sure that a 10-year-old takes the same message away from the books. Magpie: Exactly--and I agree that this is one of the themes of GoF, the difference between fantasy glory and real glory, and fantasy danger and real danger. But as you said, you don't really know until you've been there, so I do still think that there are probably many kids who'd see the glory of Harry defeating Voldemort before they saw how awful it was. Naturally the kid would assume that, being Harry Potter, he'd have the same success. Debbie: Nor would many of these kids see that despite Harry's spectacular flying ability, his talent at DADA and his resourcefulness that makes him creditable opponent for Voldemort, he would be nowhere without that "moral fibre" that the judges in the Second Task give him credit for. So to get back to the original question in the article, maybe that's the thematic importance of the scene: it highlights for those young'uns who tend to see Harry the Comic-Book Hero that a lot more goes into lasting success than cunning and bravery. Debbie who thinks she may have more to say but has run out of time and hopes this is coherent [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 3 04:30:10 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 00:30:10 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: <009601c66e5c$aae2e180$636c400c@Spot> <431E6AB4-7072-47CA-BBCD-ADDEF06DF12C@alltel.net> <002701c66e66$e5e09ca0$5472400c@Spot> <6C902166-60E1-446C-B331-0EAD6CECC519@alltel.net> Message-ID: <004101c66e6a$43f73120$5472400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151810 > kchuplis: > > Once again, reading and seeing a movie is a much different thing that > showing Hogwart's students that *live in that reality*. I believe > that several times I've pointed out that *students at Hogwarts* would > not be so excited. They don't know it's just a book. Magpie: No, they don't. There is no book for them because they don't exist. I think I've already said I understand and agree with your point that fantasizing about being Harry and actually being him are two different things. I just still don't see how this is supposed to relate to how the author chooses to deal with the many situations in canon where there's a prize at stake. -m From mariabronte at yahoo.com Wed May 3 04:31:29 2006 From: mariabronte at yahoo.com (Mari) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 04:31:29 -0000 Subject: The Trial of JKR for XC in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151811 Addendum to my previous post: set out below is the C.S Lewis 'watchful dragons' quote I mentioned if anyone is interested. "I thought I saw how stories of this kind could steal past certain inhibitions which had paralyzed much of my own religion in childhood. Why did one find it so hard to feel as one was told one ought to feel about God or about the sufferings of Christ? I thought the chief reason was that one was told one ought to. An obligation to feel can freeze feelings. And reverence itself did harm. The whole subject was associated with lowered voices, almost as if it were something medical. But supposing that by casting all these things into an imaginary world, stripping them of their stained-glass and Sunday school associations, one could make them for the first time appear in their real potency? Could one not thus steal past those watchful dragons? I thought one could." --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mari" wrote: > > number 151730> > > Tonks, thank you so much for setting all this out in such a clear > way. I am one hundred percent with you that JKR intends to reference > and re interpret events in the Christian story throughout the series. > > I don't think everything in HP has a direct equivalent in the Bible > (any more than everything in Narnia does), but your reference to the > Hogwarts motto and connection of it to C.S Lewis' remarks > about 'stealing past watchful dragons' had me grinning from ear to > ear. > > Can't help but wonder if JKR is hoping for a similar thing to what > C.S Lewis hoped (and in fact happened) with the Narnia series; HP > can be enjoyed as an exciting story, but at the same time indirectly > gets readers to think about moral and spiritual issues, which is > always best done by myth, story and parable rather than preaching :-) > > Both Lewis and JKR try to get away from the 'stained glass window' > and 'churchy' associations of the Christian story. The tremendous > continuing popularity of both series suggests they have been > eminently successful. > > Mari. > From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed May 3 04:47:04 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 23:47:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <004101c66e6a$43f73120$5472400c@Spot> References: <009601c66e5c$aae2e180$636c400c@Spot> <431E6AB4-7072-47CA-BBCD-ADDEF06DF12C@alltel.net> <002701c66e66$e5e09ca0$5472400c@Spot> <6C902166-60E1-446C-B331-0EAD6CECC519@alltel.net> <004101c66e6a$43f73120$5472400c@Spot> Message-ID: <469CA6EE-FD53-4C08-B943-07A316515B88@alltel.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151812 On May 2, 2006, at 11:30 PM, Magpie wrote: > > kchuplis: > > > > Once again, reading and seeing a movie is a much different thing > that > > showing Hogwart's students that *live in that reality*. I believe > > that several times I've pointed out that *students at Hogwarts* > would > > not be so excited. They don't know it's just a book. > > Magpie: > No, they don't. There is no book for them because they don't > exist. I > think I've already said I understand and agree with your point that > fantasizing about being Harry and actually being him are two different > things. I just still don't see how this is supposed to relate to > how the > author chooses to deal with the many situations in canon where > there's a > prize at stake. kchuplis: It sounds to me like you want your cake and eat it too. The author chooses to deal with it walking a fine line of entertainment and moralization. However, you seem to choose the fantasy level or the real life level as suits your purpose. I've given canon examples and I even gave you RL examples of what kids *think* might be cool and what that really can be like. I've supported how Harry *does* lose even thought he is given what look like a lot of "wins" as well. I think I've supported what I originally intended to say here both in the fiction world and what JKR chose to do with Harry as well as how mistaken real kids could be when looking at a similarly "kewl" but ultimately dangerous thing. To be quite honest, addressing your comment about kids reading the books and seeing the movie again, well, the movies, while entertaining, (and I think they did a good job with the graveyard scene) still aren't a fraction of what it would be like for either a fictional kid OR a real kid put in that situation. I'm really not sure what you are countering by saying you don't see how it relates to what an author chooses to do. The author can choose to do whatever they want with in a reasonable framework, and I think JKR did fine. I don't believe that "bad sportsmanship" was portrayed (and supported that). I think Harry "pays" quite a lot outside of his (and even within) his "wins". Now I just wonder how badly JKR could have failed when there are groups like this discussing her books months and even years after they've come out and after a bazillion rereads. From enlil65 at gmail.com Wed May 3 05:33:58 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 00:33:58 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1789c2360605022233w5db6f822v6d5268d2cd53ef68@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151813 On 5/2/06, chrusotoxos wrote: > Now, as it has been pointed out, why was Lily important? She certainly > was useful in some way to LV. Here are my hypothesis: > > 1. to report what happened - but as it has been said, not probable. > 2. to reward someone, or to control someone, or to ransom someone > 3. for using in magical rites or potions One way that Lily could be important to Voldemort may have to do with his own history. We are given to understand that his mother Merope simply let herself die shortly after his birth, essentially giving up on him, as if her were of little significance. To Merope, her own child wasn't even worth living for. If Merope would give up her own life so easily, why wouldn't Lily give up Harry's to save her own? If Lily were like his own mother, she would indeed be a silly girl who would simply step aside: that is what Voldemort expects of her. Certainly he isn't expecting any kind of resistance from a mother, because his own mother put up none. Maybe he is testing her. I don't think he expected her to offer to die in Harry's place, and was blinded to the power of that offer: he was simply incapable of seeing it for what it was because it was so far outside his experience. He expected her to "step aside". Lily confronted him with a reality he was blind to; that reality caused his own curse to backfire on him. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 3 09:25:33 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 09:25:33 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <6DE4C34E-054B-48C5-A92D-681D38830AC2@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151814 > kchuplis: > > No, no, of course we should discuss it. We are discussing it. Just > merely pointing out another point of view. And since we know that the > folks involved in judging have probably even a better idea of what > Harry's life is they have a different point of view. Just want to > give a new direction of thought. Maybe it does sound kind of vaguely > shaming. Maybe it should. I mean, lots of other posts sound outright > damning. Maybe Fudge and DD et al. have something to be a little > ashamed about when it comes to Harry. a_svirn: Different point of view on what exactly? On how hard Harry's life has been? I don't think it is all that different from the predominant POV. Although I doubt that Fadge would give a damn about it, I suppose everyone on-list would agree. On their duties as referees? So that because Harry's life has been so hard it's OK to make it up to him with a few extra points? That's exactly my point. It is damnably unfair to compensate Harry at the expense of other champions. Not only it undermines the rules of the game, it even casts slurs at Krum's and Cedric's characters, and surely they don't deserve that. If it wasn't Harry's fault that he'd got selected, it certainly wasn't theirs. If anyone was at fault it was Dumbledore, but rather than admit it publicly and offer an official apology to other combatants (the least he could do under the circumstances), he made the bad game worse by showing his blatant preferment of someone who shouldn't even have been there in the first place. From chrusokomos at gmail.com Wed May 3 10:24:43 2006 From: chrusokomos at gmail.com (chrusotoxos) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 10:24:43 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605022233w5db6f822v6d5268d2cd53ef68@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151815 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy Wilkins" wrote: >I don't think he expected her to offer to > die in Harry's place, and was blinded to the power of that offer: he > was simply incapable of seeing it for what it was because it was so > far outside his experience. He expected her to "step aside". > > Lily confronted him with a reality he was blind to; that reality > caused his own curse to backfire on him. > I like this reasoning; DD has always said that, as LV doesn't understand love, he underestimates it. But I still think there is something special about Lily, and that LV wouldn't have minded to keep her alive. Also, there's teh problem of why she was unarmed. Sounds like stupid, and the Potters certainly were not. Where was her wand? Ollivander mentioned it, remember? Ollivander the creepy guy, a little racist on the side, remembers Lily Evans the Muggleborn and, moreover, it is her eyes that he immediately sees in Harry's face, and not James' face, who was identical to Harry's. Flitwick remembers her well too, and Slughorn says she was brilliant, more, that she was "special". What could have happened to find this brilliant, clever, powerfully magic and special girl alone and defenceless to meet LV? And I still disagree on James' death. I don't think LV killed him to get him out of the way, because Jmaes was fighting, because he was dangerous in that preicse moment. JKR said "he died trying to protect his family but he was going to be murdered anyway". Doesn't that mean that LV wanted to kill him in the first place, that he went to Godric's Hollow that night with 2 targets in his head? Pfff...I'm so confused about everyhting.... From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 11:21:04 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 04:21:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503112104.97072.qmail@web61325.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151816 a_svirn: Different point of view on what exactly? On how hard Harry's life has been? I don't think it is all that different from the predominant POV. Although I doubt that Fadge would give a damn about it, I suppose everyone on-list would agree. On their duties as referees? So that because Harry's life has been so hard it's OK to make it up to him with a few extra points? That's exactly my point. It is damnably unfair to compensate Harry at the expense of other champions. Not only it undermines the rules of the game, it even casts slurs at Krum's and Cedric's characters, and surely they don't deserve that. If it wasn't Harry's fault that he'd got selected, it certainly wasn't theirs. If anyone was at fault it was Dumbledore, but rather than admit it publicly and offer an official apology to other combatants (the least he could do under the circumstances), he made the bad game worse by showing his blatant preferment of someone who shouldn't even have been there in the first place. Joe: Exactly what were the rules for the Tri-Wizard Tournament? I don't remember a list of them being handed out in GOF. I know the goal sounded simple, rescue what you would miss most but I am assuming that their is a whole list of rules about the tournament otherwise you could do anything to win and since we know you can cheat in the tourney then there must have been other rules. There are people who think that the only rule in football is to get the ball in the endzone. Of course there are a host of other rules that go with the game. The same is probably true for the TWT, so how can you say the judges may have undermined the rules when you don't even know for certain what the rules are? Joe From sherlocksridhar at fastmail.fm Wed May 3 04:04:20 2006 From: sherlocksridhar at fastmail.fm (sridharj_ap) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 04:04:20 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry / Accio the most powerful spell? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151817 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > I do like the idea of once she gave her life then LV trying to take > Harry's triggered some ancient magicical contract that you can't > kill someone once their life has been replaced by a willing victim. Sridhar: I think this is perfectly feasible. We have a few such instances: the UV, which is again a magical contract and the related reason why Aunt Molly's house remains Harry's best shield. A related question is the fact that Harry's protection would last only until he grew up, which is 17 in the WW. Why can't the protection last all of Harry's life? The "Children's-Magical- Protection-by-Maternal-Sacrifice Law", which we all tend to agree exists, appears to me as the missing factor. Once we know of this law, we can fit the story to the facts. On a completely unrelated note, I would have thought "Accio Wand" to be the most powerful spell. If you could snatch a Wizard's wand before he could hex you, you don't need any other magic! Since obviously none of the characters feels this way, I know that I am a muggle. Regards Sherlocksridhar From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed May 3 11:37:06 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 11:37:06 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151818 As some members have found on the OT group, there seem to be problems with Yahoo and I couldn't get onto HPFGU at all last night so, when I came onto the group at 07:30 this morning there were about 50 overnight messages. I hope I can catch up with some of the thoughts which have been surfacing in this thread - which seems to be dominating the leader board at the moment - without repeating too many thoughts, A little while ago, I commented on another thread that I was getting a trifle annoyed with the polarised stands being adopted by some members of the group. On the one hand, we seem to have a few contributors who are out to "get" Harry for everything and refuse to see anything admirable or constructive in his behaviour and on the other, those who cannot see him ever stepping out of line. I sometime wonder why the first group don't go off and start the IHHPFGU group (I hate Harry potter for Grown-ups). I think the working majority of us hopefully lie between the two. Having got that off my chest :-) I want to just express a few thoughts on one or two things which have been mentioned in this thread. Someone mentioned children wanting to be like Harry Potter. Don't we all hanker after being one of our heroes, even as grownups? Some of us might like to be footballers like Beckham, astronauts or other famous characters ? fictional or real. This may have started in our formative years and we carried it over into adulthood with the likelihood of anything even like it happening fading with the passage of time. We see perhaps the better side of these people ? the material success and perhaps their public persona, but not always the moments when nothing much happens or when things go off the rails. After all, we don't see every day with Harry, when he wasn't winning at Quidditch or losing points because of Snape or falling off his broom or wielding Gryffindor's sword. There were days when he just went to classes, had meals, chilled out with his friends and generally lived a routine existence. There is a down side to this. As an example, I would look at what was a majoy watershed in UK history - the First World War. when war was declared in 1914, thousands of young men went off to enlist in the army with the idea of going off to "beat the Hun" and experiencing the glory of battle. after four years, many of them came home, disillusioned, jobless, injured. Millions didn't. In spite of what I said in the last paargraph, Harry must often ask himself, "Why me? Why couldn't it happen to somebody else?" If he were real, I am sure he would want to live a life like his friends, free of the stress of knowing that Voldemort was after him. I personally identify with Harry because he reminds me of myself as a teenager. I was considered bright but intellectually lazy; why do homework when you can play Exploding Snap or practise for Quidditch? Often uncertain about some situations and bursting with unwarranted confidence over others. Yes, adolescence was a roller coaster ride and there were days which I would love to re-live and others I would like to wipe completely and utterly off the map. Again, some people have taken umbrage over the suggestion that Harry showed "moral fibre" and said "No way. He's never shown any". But I would like to point to just one instance that came to my mind where Harry shows altruism, and in my opinion great moral fibre. It is surprisingly early when he is still very new to the Wizarding World: `"Well, that's it then, isn't it?" Harry said. The other two stared at him. He was pale and his eyes were glittering. "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'll flatten ot 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?" He glared at them.' (PS "Through the Trapdoor" pp.196-97 UK edition) For me, that rates fairly high on the moral fibre scale Finally, for the moment, someone talked about Harry getting "breaks" and a fellow member remarked that was the privilege of heroes. I wonder how many people in the Real World can attribute their success to getting a "break"? Being spotted by someone who saw their potential and had the power to open doors? Ask Daniel Radcliffe about the break which propelled him into fame as Harry in the "medium that dare not speak it's name". Why not ask JKR herself? I seem to recall that there was a break when a publisher accepted the "Philosopher's Stone" From sherlocksridhar at fastmail.fm Wed May 3 11:35:16 2006 From: sherlocksridhar at fastmail.fm (sridharj_ap) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 11:35:16 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151819 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: Doesn't that mean > that LV wanted to kill him in the first place, that he went to > Godric's Hollow that night with 2 targets in his head? > > Pfff...I'm so confused about everyhting.... Sridhar: Was James already a target? Did LV think he was doing Snape a favor by killing James and leaving Snape to woo Lily (since he is convinced Snape is on his side and he knows Snape and James hate each other)? He is already convinced that Harry is the threat. I am as confused as you, probably more. Sridhar, who wonders if he is Professor Lockhardt. From winkadup at yahoo.com Wed May 3 11:41:48 2006 From: winkadup at yahoo.com (Wendy Dupuy) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 04:41:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape's son Message-ID: <20060503114148.36262.qmail@web34113.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151820 This is a dream I had last night. Snape was always in love with Narcissa. Always watching her, she in turn cared for Snape as well. But because of bloodlines she actually had no choice who she married, she knew this and Lucius was chosen. Snape broken hearted made love potion to give her but seeing her, knowing it was hurting her too he couldn't give it to her. He loved her to much. He was so disgusted with the "class of Bloodlines" in the wizarding world he retreats to the muggle side. There he sees a beautiful muggle woman. Snape being on the rebound, wanting to feel love, wanting to be loved back gets very desperate. He gives her the love potion. She does not know he is a wizard, she is clueless. The potion works they begin to have the happy life he never thought he himself would have. He is so overcome with happiness he decides to not give her the potion (maybe like LV's mother) and let her know he is a wizard and life can be better. She reacts like Petunia did when she found out her sister Lily was a witch. She called him a freak, threw him out of her life. She was pregnant. He has a son which he can't not have anything to do with. He watches him from as far. He returns with more hate in his heart than before to the wizarding world. Dumbledore spying for the OotP, follows Snape. He learns that Snape has a child. Both know that he had a child with a muggle would be an absolute "no-no" to LV's gang. Snape knows the child would be in danger. Deatheaters are taking about taking over both worlds, muggles can be servants. He does not want this for his son. Then this is when Dumbledore approaches him about protecting his son, helping the "good side". Snape confesses all that he has done, gives his loyalty to Dumbledore. There is no higher trust than when you trust someone with the life of your child. This is the missing piece in my dream. This is why Snape hates Harry more that James' son can go to Hogwarts, his can not, it just kills him everytime he sees Harry break rules or do something stupid. Not to mention he looks so much like James. Of course, I had to dream that Dumbledore is not dead. He faked his death to get the Horcruxes. To have LV "off his back" so to say. LV is so busy bragging that he is about to take over the world, and getting rid of his last business with going after Harry to rap it up. This gives all the openness for Dumbledore who took Olviner to make another wand or prevent him giving LV one to break the PI spell. Harry & LV battle and at the end of it, Dumbledore shows up killing LV. I must be going mad, because in my dream I wondered "Why wouldn't McGonagal know anything?" This woke me up from a great dream, after reading everyone's posts. Going Potter mad, Winkadup From cassy_ferris at yahoo.com Wed May 3 08:21:04 2006 From: cassy_ferris at yahoo.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 12:21:04 +0400 (MSD) Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503082104.13314.qmail@web38313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151821 >justcarol67 wrote: >the parents generally either fought back as James did or used Side-Along >Apparition to get the children out of harm's way, as James seems to >have suggested to Lily ("Take Harry and run!"), instead of offering >their lives for their child's, as Lily did. Why didn't she try to run? James did give her few seconds to try and escape. Surely Lily was very brave and she didn't want to leave her husband, but wasn't Harry more important? Even if LV had performed some anti-apparition spell, she could summon a broom and try to fly away or even better create a portkey somewhere safe. Lily WAS extremely good at charms, wasn't she? Cassy From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Wed May 3 11:51:27 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 07:51:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter / Bad Slytherins In-Reply-To: <6DE8E652-B91A-4DBB-B8AD-2663D6004734@alltel.net> Message-ID: <20060503115127.82967.qmail@web37213.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151822 > Betsy Hp: > I'd love to see him take something and pay for it. I mean, really, > really, pay for it. > Not think he's going to pay for it and then > have Dumbledore save him. (Ooh, hey! Maybe that'll happen in book > 7?) Catherine now: I would put Sirius' death in that category. I think Harry did pay *big time* for that. He also knows how lucky he is that none of the students who came with him died. He messed up there and paid for it. And learned from it too. I can't really fault his Quidditch success, in a lot of sports, success does depend on one or two gifted players. And they lost the first 2 years that Woods was captain, despite having great teams. And isnt't it canon that quite often teams have long winning streaks? Didn't Slytherin win the cup 7 years in a row? Catherine --------------------------------- 7 bucks a month. This is Huge Yahoo! Music Unlimited [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherlocksridhar at fastmail.fm Wed May 3 06:43:01 2006 From: sherlocksridhar at fastmail.fm (sridharj_ap) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 06:43:01 -0000 Subject: The Trial of JKR for XC in HP (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151823 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > J.K. Rowling - God's Smuggler. > > Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury: Allow me to present the case for > the prosecution in the matter of J.K. Rowling and the Use of > Christian Symbolism in the Harry Potter books. I will attempt to > show, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Ms. Rowling has with clear > intent, deliberately and with forethought used symbols and methods > of arranging said symbols to construct hidden clues that she knew > were of specific significance to the Christian community. > Tonks_op Sridhar: Brilliant post Tonks. Reminds me of the "Da Vinci" Code. If what you have said is right, the "Harry is a Horcrux" theory seems more reasonable to me now. One way this might play out is: Harry has to sacrifice himself to destroy the last Horcrux. The act of sacrificing one's life willingly might trigger off another "ancient magical law" to bring Harry back to life. Or DD (if he is alive) and Fawkes might bring back Harry from the near-dead realm, although there is nothing in the canon to suggest this. Overall, I feel that there is going to be a sacrificial element towards the end. Will it be Harry or Snape or DD remains to be seen. Grrr, Ms. Rowling, please release the book VII. If only I knew legilimency! Regards Sherlocksridhar From silmariel at telefonica.net Wed May 3 12:38:39 2006 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 14:38:39 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherin House was Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200605031438.39167.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151824 > > Joe: > > As for Quidditch I seem to remember most of the rows in the > Gryffindor/ Slytherin Quidditch matches being started by the > Slytherins. Not to mention the fact that if the whole school thinks > the Slytherins are low down no good dirty cheaters then its more > than likely that they are. If all your peers seem to dislike you as > the other Houses seem to do then there is probably a good reason for > it. > > I don't think all the other House's are out of step here. I > think most of the Slytherins are as advertised. Sometimes the bad > guys are really bad guys. Na, I think they're not so bad as the Slytherin legend has made them. As a whole House, of course. Even Draco, till HBP, was pretty pathetic as a villain. Too much ado about nothing. 'Cause Harry always wins. Hey, I believe DE children are a small fraction of the house, and it would be too brutal for words if all of them would be as D,C&G - but that's because I tend to believe the author. http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview3.shtml ES: Why is Slytherin house still - JKR: Still allowed! [All laugh] ES: Yes! I mean, it's such a stigma. JKR: But they're not all bad. They literally are not all bad. [Pause.] Well, the deeper answer, the non-flippant answer, would be that you have to embrace all of a person, you have to take them with their flaws, and everyone's got them. It's the same way with the student body. If only they could achieve perfect unity, you would have an absolute unstoppable force, and I suppose it's that craving for unity and wholeness that means that they keep that quarter of the school that maybe does not encapsulate the most generous and noble qualities, in the hope, in the very Dumbledore-esque hope that they will achieve union, and they will achieve harmony. Harmony is the word. ES: Couldn't - JKR: Couldn't they just shoot them all? NO, Emerson, they really couldn't! [All laugh] ES: Couldn't they just put them into the other three houses, and maybe it wouldn't be a perfect fit for all of them, but a close enough fit that they would get by and wouldn't be in such a negative environment? JKR: They could. But you must remember, I have thought about this - ES: Even their common room is a gloomy dark room- JKR: Well, I don't know, because I think the Slytherin common room has a spooky beauty. ES: It's gotta be a bad idea to stick all the Death Eaters' kids together in one place. [All crack up again ] JKR: But they're not all - don't think I don't take your point, but - we, the reader, and I as the writer, because I'm leading you all there - you are seeing Slytherin house always from the perspective of Death Eaters' children. *They are a _small_fraction_ of the total Slytherin population* (emphasis mine, silmariel). I'm not saying all the other Slytherins are adorable, but they're certainly not Draco, they're certainly not, you know, Crabbe and Goyle. They're not all like that, that would be too brutal for words, wouldn't it? ES: But there aren't a lot of Death Eater children in the other houses, are there? JKR: You will have people connected with Death Eaters in the other houses, yeah, absolutely. ES: Just in lesser numbers. JKR: Probably. I hear you. It is the tradition to have four houses, but in this case, I wanted them to correspond roughly to the four elements. So Gryffindor is fire, Ravenclaw is air, Hufflepuff is earth, and Slytherin is water, hence the fact that their common room is under the lake. So again, it was this idea of harmony and balance, that you had four necessary components and by integrating them you would make a very strong place. But they remain fragmented, as we know. > > Joe: > > Erm don't we see a great deal of Bullying by Malfoy, Crabbe and > > Goyle. Well at least attempted bullying? Just because they are bad > at it doens't mean they aren't doing it. > > Alla: > > Sure we do. Neville comes to mind of the top of my head right away. > Now, to be fair, I don't see Draco as a bully for his interactions with the trio, maybe for Neville, but yes for this: "A short distance away, Draco Malfoy, followed by a small gang of cronies including Crabble, Goyle and Pansy Parkinson, was pushing some timid-looking second years out of the way so that he and his friends could get a coach to themselves." OoP - ch 10 Luna Lovegood They are so impersonal targets, and second years. He has just received his prefect badge. Pushing implies physical contact? (Those second language problems, the direct translation to my own language makes it physical) Silmariel From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed May 3 12:46:14 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 12:46:14 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151825 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, Chapter 14, Felix Felicis The chapter opens with the Trio on their way to Herbology class. They have trouble finding the greenhouse because of the strange mist. They use the time to discuss Harry's session with Dumbledore. Once in class, they have to don a great deal of protective gear to begin working on the Snargaluff assignment. Harry brings up the Slug Club. We learn that Slughorn fawns over McLaggen because he's well connected and that Gwenog Jones was at the party. This sets Ron off. He is surprised that Hermione was planning to ask him to the Christmas party, and admits he wouldn't rather she went with McLaggen. Harry is very concerned about how the budding romance between Ron and Hermione will impact the Trio's friendship. We also get to see Hermione warning against any of the HBP's spells and we see Neville doing better than everyone else. Harry chooses Dean Thomas to fill in for Katie Bell. He wants to beat Slytherin in the next game, and is aware that some of the Gryffindors will not be happy that he's chosen another classmate for the team. Ron and Harry walk in on Ginny and Dean snogging behind a tapestry. Ron and Ginny argue about her relationship and Ron's lack of experience. Harry is conflicted between his attraction to Ginny and his loyalty to Ron. He thinks it would be inappropriate to date Ginny. Ron is now angry at Ginny and Dean. Having learned that Hermione and Krum had kissed, he treats Hermione with an "icy, sneering indifference." Ron is so upset he plays worse than ever and is behaving badly toward everyone. Harry threatens to pull him off the team if he doesn't behave better, but also tries to boost Ron's confidence. Harry gets an idea and the morning of the game, appears to slip something in Ron's pumpkin juice. Hermione sees and protests. Harry reminds her that she had confunded McLaggen earlier in the season. Luck is with them: the weather is perfect, the Slytherin Chaser Vaisey and the Seeker Malfoy are out sick, the replacement seeker Harper is an idiot (according to Ginny.) Ron realizes he drank Felix Felicis at breakfast. Harry sees the crowd of green-and-silver at one end, red-and-gold on the other; and notes that Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws have also taken sides. The announcer is Zacharias Smith. Most of his comments are disparaging ones about Gryffindor. Harry thinks Smith misses some of the plays. It seems Gryffindor could do no wrong and takes the lead early. Ron is making saves with ease. Harper slams into Harry and makes a comment about Weasley being a blood-traitor. Then Harry asks how much Malfoy had paid him to play. This causes Harper to lose concentration and Harry catches the snitch. The Gryffindor teams fly into a group hug, except for Ginny. She crashes into the announcer's podium, knocking Smith off his feet. McGonagall is irate, and Ginny claims to have had trouble breaking. After the game, Hermione confronts Ron and Harry. We learn, and see proof, that Harry hadn't spiked the pumpkin juice, that Ron had played well because he thought he was lucky. Unfortunately, Ron takes Hermione's comment as proof she didn't believe in him and things became worse between them. At the party, girls surround Harry and Ron is wrapped around Lavender. Harry finds Hermione in a classroom with yellow birds circling her head. She's described as looking like a feathery model of the solar system. Ron comes in with Lavender, who quickly leaves when she sees Hermione. Hermione leaves too, and at the last moment sends the birds to attack Ron. Felix Felicis Questions: 1.The strange mist, which we know is due to Dementors breeding, is so thick the Trio has trouble finding the Greenhouse. It's mentioned very casually. Do you think it's important? Could it contribute to any of the emotions we see in the next few chapters? 2. The Snargaluff scene is very well described for something that is unimportant. It seems a mixture of the Devil's Snare episode from SS/PS, having dental work done, and a character from "Winnie the Pooh." Is this just more scenery? 3.Harry makes some difficult decisions as a Quidditch captain. In what ways has he grown? 4. The Slytherin team members are Urquhart, Harper and Vaisey. Any thoughts on those names and what they might mean, or what images they conjure? How do they compare to the names of the Gryffindor beaters Peakes and Coote? 5. Many Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs had taken sides. Does this give the impression that Slytherin House is not universally disliked? It sounds as if the individuals within the two houses had taken sides, not that one house was pulling for one team. What does this mean? 6. Do you think Malfoy had to "bribe" Harper to play? Does Harper know Malfoy is up to something? 7. Zacharias Smith is pretty petty in this scene. Do you think he is related to Hepzibah Smith? How are they alike? 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? If McGonagall was there, why wasn't she giving Smith what for? 9. We don't hear anything about the Snape-McGonagall Quidditch rivalry anymore. JKR has said she's glad to have written the last Quidditch game. Did JKR tire of the rivalry too? Do the two professors have more important things on their minds? Do you miss the rivalry? 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who admires him? 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about love? 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? 13. "Felix Felicis" is the title of the chapter. What part did the potion really play? Does this tell us anything about the potion or was it just part of the set up? 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." Was Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can you think of other chapters that may have been written like this? Potioncat, who would like to thank Penapart_Elf and Carol for suggestions and encouragement. NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 3 14:37:45 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 14:37:45 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <469CA6EE-FD53-4C08-B943-07A316515B88@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151826 > kchuplis: I'm really not sure what you are countering by saying you > don't see how it relates to what an author chooses to do. The author > can choose to do whatever they want with in a reasonable framework, > and I think JKR did fine. I don't believe that "bad sportsmanship" > was portrayed (and supported that). I think Harry "pays" quite a lot > outside of his (and even within) his "wins". Now I just wonder how > badly JKR could have failed when there are groups like this > discussing her books months and even years after they've come out and > after a bazillion rereads. Magpie: Well, to be honest, neither do I understand what I'm supposed to be countering when I've agreed with you on the "movie vs. reality" and "fantasy vs. reality" and "story vs. reality." I guess what I'm also bringing in is the fact that the thread was about how the contest in GoF went down, and how contests in HP in general went down. My pov on that is still that they stick to a pretty similar pattern. You brought in this issue as a different perspective, and I guess I'm still not quite sure what that perspective is supposed to be or how it's supposed to affect that first line of thought. It seems like a perfectly obvious, valid thing to talk about in the books. I see no need to qualify it by remembering that Harry gets crucio'd in GoF. It just seems like--and maybe I'm misreading it--but the tone in your posts, the references to other thousands of threads etc., makes it seem like you just really have a problem with the way some people talk about the books, like some posters aren't showing proper respect to the author or to the fictional characters. I like taking apart books. Taking them apart, even when it means pointing out a flaw in them or something that I didn't think was great at the time does not make me like them less. To me, this is what appreciating a book is, and it's part of the reason that "there are groups like this discussing her books months and even years after they've come out and after a bazillion rereads." When I read or write a post dissecting the story or pointing out a flaw I don't hear "JKR failed." It's the way I've pretty much always looked at stories--to the point where it's what I do for a living, sitting sometimes on one side of the editorial desk, sometimes the other. It's very difficult for me to look at the story a different way. Sometimes different fans' ways of appreciating or talking about the books annoy each other. -m From enlil65 at gmail.com Wed May 3 15:17:11 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 10:17:11 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: References: <1789c2360605022233w5db6f822v6d5268d2cd53ef68@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1789c2360605030817k3b0f51cev9f2f7db95230c6d6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151827 On 5/3/06, chrusotoxos wrote: > And I still disagree on James' death. I don't think LV killed him to > get him out of the way, because Jmaes was fighting, because he was > dangerous in that preicse moment. JKR said "he died trying to protect > his family but he was going to be murdered anyway". Doesn't that mean > that LV wanted to kill him in the first place, that he went to > Godric's Hollow that night with 2 targets in his head? I always assumed that with "he was going to be murdered anyway" JKR meant simply that he wasn't offered a choice, whereas Lily was; and that that was the basic difference between James' death and LIly's death. James couldn't offer to die in Harry's place because he was outright killed. For my own thinking, I'm not ruling out the possibility that there really was a reason Lily was offered the chance to live, but I'm just saying that it's possible to understand this situation without requiring that to be the case, because of Voldemort's view of mothers based on his own mother's having given up on him. Had Lily stepped aside, it would have confirmed Voldemort's views. It could have been a subconscious ploy on his part to test this. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From kchuplis at alltel.net Wed May 3 15:37:55 2006 From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 10:37:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: Message-ID: <01b501c66ec7$8c0b83f0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> No: HPFGUIDX 151828 ----- Original Message ----- From: sistermagpie To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:37 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter It just seems like--and maybe I'm misreading it--but the tone in your posts, the references to other thousands of threads etc., makes it seem like you just really have a problem with the way some people talk about the books, like some posters aren't showing proper respect to the author or to the fictional characters. kchuplis: It just gets to sounding from posts after a while that people aren't just discussing but actually complaining about Harry and how he behaves and how DD behaves and well, yeah, as though any of us who find JKR a tolerable writer are idiots. Is it perfect? No, but the sportsmanship angle kept being dragged back to "why should Harry get any breaks" and how he should "lose" and I just thought I'd point out that Harry loses in plenty of ways. magpie: I like taking apart books. Taking them apart, even when it means pointing out a flaw in them or something that I didn't think was great at the time does not make me like them less. kchuplis: And I don't mind that, but there is also nothing wrong with me pointing out that maybe those aren't flaws. Maybe you perceive them as flaws, but I did not. magpie: To me, this is what appreciating a book is, and it's part of the reason that "there are groups like this discussing her books months and even years after they've come out and after a bazillion rereads." kchuplis: Agreed. I'm sorry if I ruffled your feathers by saying that. magpie: When I read or write a post dissecting the story or pointing out a flaw I don't hear "JKR failed." It's the way I've pretty much always looked at stories--to the point where it's what I do for a living, sitting sometimes on one side of the editorial desk, sometimes the other. It's very difficult for me to look at the story a different way. Sometimes different fans' ways of appreciating or talking about the books annoy each other. kchuplis: Like I said, there is nothing wrong with dissection and yet when I present ideas I have about what is considered "flawed" and show that I don't believe them to be unreasonable plot and character points, fictionally or even in relation to the real world, I feel like I am being taken to task by you and I feel like my opinions are not "real" because you bring up the fact that you are, apparently, an editor. So maybe I am misunderstanding that tone as well. E-communications are not always the best at conveying subtle ideas. I know I'm not a huge intellect, or a big regular here but I believe my opinion is as valid as yours as a reader. Please do not take me to task for having a differing opinion on what "flaws" are in HP. I was simply countering what I was reading in posts here. JKR uses very large and convoluted plot devices and has since SS/PS. We know that about her writing. I do not agree that awarding Harry points in the TWT for feeling an overwhelming compulsion to "save" is bad sportsmandship, I don't believe that all the 7th years wanting to participate in the TWT has any bearing on how dangerous it is or could be, I do believe that Harry, unlike the other participants, has good reason to believe that danger is quite possibly life threatening considering his situation and how he came to be in the tournament as well as with the past books "adventures", I'm not not even sure I agree that the judges (of course, other than Ludo, who we know by the end to be totally trying to "throw" the competition) are *wrong* to award Harry extra points since we have no idea how the judging is really done. I do think DD has a reason to try to get Harry "extras" when he can since it's pretty much DD's doing that Harry is who he is and how he is and DD knows it. Is that a flaw? Well, no, it actually fits very well with what we find out in OoTP. I don't find that Harry always wins and never pays... Is this wrong of me to present those opinions? I think not. From a writing side, I'm not a professional but GoF is hung on the plot framework of the TWT. That *is* the whole book. It is not a departure in style since every book previously is hung on convoluted and fantastical situations. That is something that is acceptable about her writing if you enjoy reading the books. Within those convoluted frameworks, she has to make the characters react and behave in a reasonable (for their character) manner. That is what (to me) is really important. I think she does. But I'm just a reader, not a professional. At any rate, I made my points, I'm not going to bash them to death and I will now return to lurking until I see something that I feel like commenting on. At least this isn't a Snape thread :) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tifflblack at earthlink.net Wed May 3 15:55:11 2006 From: tifflblack at earthlink.net (Tiffany Black) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 08:55:11 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151829 Potion cat wrote: 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? Tiffany: Yes, I did think that Harry had spiked Ron's drink and I was furious with Harry for so blatantly breaking the rules. Then when I found out what he'd really done I thought he was quite clever, using that placebo effect on Ron. It's just a good thing all those things happened right after breakfast. BTW, loved Ginny smashing into the announcer's stand. Lol. Tiffany 13. "Felix Felicis" is the title of the chapter. What part did the potion really play? Does this tell us anything about the potion or was it just part of the set up? 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." Was Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can you think of other chapters that may have been written like this? Potioncat, who would like to thank Penapart_Elf and Carol for suggestions and encouragement. NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database 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 jenneferp at muzak.com Wed May 3 15:59:48 2006 From: jenneferp at muzak.com (jenzajlp) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 15:59:48 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151830 Cassie wrote: Even if LV had performed some anti-apparition spell, she could summon a broom and try to fly away or even better create a portkey somewhere safe. Lily WAS extremely good at charms, wasn't she? Jenza now: This has been troubling me for quite some time now since this thread began. Voldemort entered Godric's Hollow and James gave Lily a headstart, essentially telling her to take Harry and flee. Did she not have time or did she have another plan? The thing that most puzzles me is the fact that we have heard time and time again that Lily was a very powerful witch (at the very least in Charms and Potions). So when Voldie entered baby Harry's room and she put herself between them, WHY didn't she have a wand? Why didn't she attempt in any way to perform ANY KIND of magic? If she knew Voldie was on his way, wouldn't she have armed herself? Did Lily not have time to grab her wand? I should think this not really plausible as during a dark time as this, knowing that your family is at risk, going so far as to have a Secret Keeper, wouldn't you have your wand, your greatest weapon, at the ready at all times? Was it in fact Lily's plan all along to step between Harry & Voldemort, thereby saving Harry's life? If so, then she would know that a wand would not be necessary. Or is it something else we don't know? I'm beginning to wonder about a half-baked theory - could Lily have transferred her magical powers to Harry along with her blood protection? Was she in fact, completely powerless when Voldemort came along that night? So many questions. I'd appreciate your feedback! -jenza From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed May 3 16:25:25 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 09:25:25 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151831 Jenza wrote: This has been troubling me for quite some time now since this thread began. Voldemort entered Godric's Hollow and James gave Lily a headstart, essentially telling her to take Harry and flee. Did she not have time or did she have another plan? The thing that most puzzles me is the fact that we have heard time and time again that Lily was a very powerful witch (at the very least in Charms and Potions). So when Voldie entered baby Harry's room and she put herself between them, WHY didn't she have a wand? Why didn't she attempt in any way to perform ANY KIND of magic? If she knew Voldie was on his way, wouldn't she have armed herself? Did Lily not have time to grab her wand? I should think this not really plausible as during a dark time as this, knowing that your family is at risk, going so far as to have a Secret Keeper, wouldn't you have your wand, your greatest weapon, at the ready at all times? Sherry now: Has it ever been said, that Lily did not have a wand? I can't remember from the interview if JKR said categorically, that Lily was unarmed? She may have had her wand, but with her whole focus being on saving Harry, she may have thought she couldn't get to it or use it fast enough. Voldemort could have disarmed her as well. We don't yet know all the details of what exactly did happen. Even though I resent the idea that lily's sacrifice was better and braver than James' dying to protect his family, I can understand a mother's desperation to try to stand between her child and an enemy. As for not apparating, could there be something like anti apparation charms, that would have prevented people from apparating into the grounds or house, but would also prevent people apparating away? After all, the Potters were confident in their secret keeper and might not have thought they needed to be able to apparate out. but then, if they were so confident, why have anti apparation anyway? Sherry From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed May 3 16:45:51 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 09:45:51 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151832 Potion Cat: Great summary and questions, potion Cat! I'm just responding to a couple questions right now, but will think on the others later. Snipping the great summary. Potion Cat: 9. We don't hear anything about the Snape-McGonagall Quidditch rivalry anymore. JKR has said she's glad to have written the last Quidditch game. Did JKR tire of the rivalry too? Do the two professors have more important things on their minds? Do you miss the rivalry? Sherry now: I have to admit feeling gleeful and relieved, when I read JKR's comments about having written her last Quidditch match. I'm so tired of quidditch. It hasn't been interesting since POA. And it seems almost too frivolous now, with the war on and people dying. and there are so many more things I want to know about in the books, that I'm glad to think the chapters won't be taken up with quidditch any longer. I would guess the staff probably feels somewhat the same. After all, things are pretty grim in their world right now, and prior friendly rivalry over their house teams doesn't seem very appropriate now. Potion Cat: 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who admires him? Sherry: I think that Ginny's digs at him really got under his skin. How galling for a boy to think his little sister is more experienced than he, and how it must have bothered him, that he was still so innocent. I think lavender was available and he went for it, out of anger, out of desire to get that experience, and out of the need to feel admired. Potion Cat: 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about love? sherry: This is one of my least favorite Hermione scenes. In fact, I didn't like her much through the entire book, till the last scene after the funeral. I can only put it down to teenager acting like a teenager. Ron has never physically attacked Hermione, and her sending the birds after him was pretty violent, in my opinion. Birds can really do some damage. Potion Cat: 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." Was Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can you think of other chapters that may have been written like this? Sherry: Wow, that is a fantastic question, and now you've got me pondering! I've never really believed that Snape's worst memory, as it's been presented in OOTP, can possibly be his worst memory. I've wondered if one of the other memories in the Pensieve is really the worst. Now I want to go through the chapters to find others in this manner. I'll be interested to read what others think. Potioncat, who would like to thank Penapart_Elf and Carol for suggestions and encouragement. sherry Thanking Potion Cat for such a great chapter discussion. From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Wed May 3 16:57:21 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 16:57:21 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151833 Jenza wrote: The thing that most puzzles me is the fact that we have heard time and time again that Lily was a very powerful witch (at > the very least in Charms and Potions). So when Voldie entered baby Harry's room and she put herself between them, WHY didn't she have a wand? Why didn't she attempt in any way to perform ANY KIND of magic? If she knew Voldie was on his way, wouldn't she have armed herself? Steven1965aa: I may be wrong but I don't remember anywhere that said that Lily did not try to defend herself and Harry. I thought the point was that she was given a choice, she could have fled and saved herself and left Harry to Voldemort, but instead she chose to stay. It was that choice which was the sacrifice. From chrusokomos at gmail.com Wed May 3 17:45:34 2006 From: chrusokomos at gmail.com (chrusotoxos) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 17:45:34 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151834 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > Has it ever been said, that Lily did not have a wand? I can't remember from > the interview if JKR said categorically, that Lily was unarmed? She may > have had her wand, but with her whole focus being on saving Harry, she may > have thought she couldn't get to it or use it fast enough. Voldemort could > have disarmed her as well. We don't yet know all the details of what > exactly did happen. Even though I resent the idea that lily's sacrifice was > better and braver than James' dying to protect his family, I can understand > a mother's desperation to try to stand between her child and an enemy. > Chrusotoxos: At first, I was sure that Lily would at least had her wand when facing LV, but then someone on this list pointed out that LV would hardly say "Move aside, silly girl" to a fighting witch ready to grasp his bowel out. His sentence, and Lily's reply, "Take me instead", suggest that Lily was defenceless. So either a) LV had disarmed her (but then why didn't he kill her? or stun her?) or b) she never had one, but then why? It seems obvious that James and Lily weren't thinking on the same lines: a plan to flee, considering their situation, was certainly discussed in advance, but then something didn't work. You have LV walking slowly to their house (ok, this is the movie, but JKR controls it, doesn't she?), it is insane even for James to stand there. They surely had a plan which didn't work, forcing James to sacrifice himself and Lily to come up with some clever last minute idea - only she didn't. This "problem", as I see it, must have been the mysterious person(s) JKR is always hinting were there. Who was it? Not Peter - Sirius met him short before the murder. Not a lesser DE than LV, they wouldn't have made it past the wards. So a friend, and here everything points at Snape again. I disliked Snape in the beginning, then I was forced head-first in the magical fandom world, and now I want to believe him. But alas, in canon nothing proves he's good, and JKR always said she dislikes him, laughs maniacally when asked on which side he is and even added that he is despicable because someone loved him (vs. LV, who never knew what love was) - and here is another question: who? Ok, maybe his parents, and? From orgone9 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 14:24:05 2006 From: orgone9 at yahoo.com (Len Jaffe) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 07:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503142405.74273.qmail@web80606.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151835 potioncat wrote: > > Felix Felicis Questions: > > 1.The strange mist, which we know is due to > Dementors breeding, is so > thick the Trio has trouble finding the Greenhouse. > It's mentioned > very casually. Do you think it's important? Could it > contribute to > any of the emotions we see in the next few chapters? Len says: Could be, could be... judgement (direction) clouded by emotions. Dementors (dementia - inability to see reality) breeding... Pretty direct metaphor. potioncat wrote: > 2. The Snargaluff scene is very well described for > something that is > unimportant. It seems a mixture of the Devil's Snare > episode from > SS/PS, having dental work done, and a character from > "Winnie the > Pooh." Is this just more scenery? Len declares: Did we ever learn what the snargaluff pods were used for? Every other Herbology plant has come back as a plot device (devils snare twice in SS/PS & OOTP and mandrakes in COS). Either it was an oversite, some agressive editing, or we'll see snargaluff in B7. If it is scenery, alls the better. I loved PS/SS becuase of all the scenery (e.g. every flavor beans). Sometimes it's nice to read a little scenery. It's probably anice departure, to write creatively, and not have to worry if it will fit the canon from five previous books. potioncat wrote: > 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for > something that happened > two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he > need/want someone who admires him? Len gesticulates wildly: Teenage boy syndrome. Some grow out of it. Some just become men. He is using Lavender in the sense that he needs someone to want/admire him. Who doesn't? I think it's partly to get back at Hermione for Krumm (and I think it's about Hermione snogging anyone, not just Krum, it's a payback for he feelings of betrayal), partly following Ginny's advice and getting some experience, and partly out of the need that sixteen year old boys have to validate their manlyness. Additonally, snogging rules! Wiping the spittle from his chin, Len crawls back under his rock. From greekgoddessofthenight at yahoo.com Wed May 3 12:20:59 2006 From: greekgoddessofthenight at yahoo.com (Nyx) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 12:20:59 -0000 Subject: STATE OF CONFUSION! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151836 Hi Everyone - I am brand new on the group - but not new to the Harry Potter Mania. I was wondering if anyone could clear up some confusion. It's been quite some time since I finished reading the 6th book where Dumbledore gets killed. A friend of mine told me that it was Harry that was supposed to be killed - but Dumbledore made a deal with Snape to kill him instead of Harry. I don't recall reading this in the book. Did I miss something? Thanks Nyx From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 12:39:17 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 05:39:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Slytherin House WAS: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <200605031438.39167.silmariel@telefonica.net> Message-ID: <20060503123917.67468.qmail@web61312.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151837 Silmariel:Na, I think they're not so bad as the Slytherin legend has made them. As a whole House, of course. Even Draco, till HBP, was pretty pathetic as a villain. Too much ado about nothing. 'Cause Harry always wins. Joe: So it's okay Malfoy to be horrible as long as he's a complete moron at it? Sorry but just because you stink at being a racist bully doesn't make it okay. Silmariel: Hey, I believe DE children are a small fraction of the house, and it would be too brutal for words if all of them would be as D,C&G - but that's because I tend to believe the author. JKR: But they're not all - don't think I don't take your point, but - we, the reader, and I as the writer, because I'm leading you all there - you are seeing Slytherin house always from the perspective of Death Eaters' children. *They are a _small_fraction_ of the total Slytherin population* (emphasis mine, silmariel). I'm not saying all the other Slytherins are adorable, but they're certainly not Draco, they're certainly not, you know, Crabbe and Goyle. They're not all like that, that would be too brutal for words, wouldn't it? ES: But there aren't a lot of Death Eater children in the other houses, are there? JKR: You will have people connected with Death Eaters in the other houses, yeah, absolutely. ES: Just in lesser numbers. Joe: I snipped a lot of your post to keep the reply from being to long. But I see what you posted as supporting my position. I didn't say all the Slytherins were evil and Death Eaters. I did say that many of them were low down cheating scumbags. JKR says they do not represent the most noble and generous of charicteristics. She also says that she isn't saying all the other Slytherins are adorable either. What she is saying is that they can be rotten people and not be evil. Silmariel: Now, to be fair, I don't see Draco as a bully for his interactions with the trio, maybe for Neville, but yes for this: "A short distance away, Draco Malfoy, followed by a small gang of cronies including Crabble, Goyle and Pansy Parkinson, was pushing some timid-looking second years out of the way so that he and his friends could get a coach to themselves." OoP - ch 10 Luna Lovegood Joe: Exactly why isn't it bullying when Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle? Can you only try to bully some people? No offense but that doesn't make any sense at all. Not all Slytherins are skinheads in nice robes like Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle but many of them are horrible people. Thats the reason why the other House think they are horrible. Because enough of them are that it stands out. Not everybody is just a misunderstood teddy bear. Joe From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed May 3 18:28:14 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 18:28:14 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151838 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jenzajlp" wrote: >> > Was it in fact Lily's plan all along to step between Harry & > Voldemort, thereby saving Harry's life? If so, then she would know > that a wand would not be necessary. > > Or is it something else we don't know? I'm beginning to wonder > about a half-baked theory - could Lily have transferred her magical > powers to Harry along with her blood protection? Tonks: I think there is a slim possibility that Lily might have known of a magical theory that was never put to the test. Which takes us back to the question of what is the ancient magic that allowed Lily's sacrifice to prevent Harry's murder? I don't think it is important to the plot to know why LV was going to spare Lily, only that he was. Does anyone know of any custom in any culture since the beginning of time in which one person who was tried for a crime could have someone die it his place? There must have been some custom like this somewhere. Is there anything in ancient laws that allows for someone to take the place of another? We see this theme in both Lily and Harry and in Bartty Crouch Jr .and his mother. I think there are clues here if only we could figure them out. Also I wonder about the fact that LV now has Lily's blood within him. This must play into this ancient magic in someway and is the reason for DD's twinkle. I really think that we need to unravel the 'ancient magic". Any helpers??? Tonks_op From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 18:32:33 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 18:32:33 -0000 Subject: The Validity of Various Topics (was:Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151839 > >>Geoff: > > A little while ago, I commented on another thread that I was > getting a trifle annoyed with the polarised stands being adopted > by some members of the group. On the one hand, we seem to have a > few contributors who are out to "get" Harry for everything and > refuse to see anything admirable or constructive in his behaviour > and on the other, those who cannot see him ever stepping out of > line. I sometime wonder why the first group don't go off and start > the IHHPFGU group (I hate Harry potter for Grown-ups). I think the > working majority of us hopefully lie between the two. > Betsy Hp: Since I have a sneaking suspicion you'd put me in that former catagory, I'd like to defend my membership on this list. I *do* actually like Harry. It is possible (believe it or not ) to like the boy and still have problems with how he sees things or even with how he's treated. I think it's possible to like the books and see various ethical and philosophical issues raised within the books that, yes, can lead to some rather polarized positions. In fact, I tend to like books that raise such issues. I personally think JKR is playing a bit of a sly game with Slytherin and that they will be shown to not be the source of all that's wrong in the WW. In fact, I'd go further and say that the scapegoating of Slytherin is a key to what is actually wrong in the WW. So, in putting forth such arguments I feel that I'm actually backing the author. Others, of course, disagree. And that's perfectly fine, IMO. I do see some ways that JKR's philosophy is not my own. I'm rather afraid that she approves of the twins, for example. But I don't think that means that I can't share my views on the matter. That's what good books do. They get you thinking. And adults should be able to share their various and even conflicting thoughts with each other. Without suggestions being made that they leave the club- house. Betsy Hp P.S. I'm not sure this was your point at all Geoff, so please don't take this as a personal attack. But this view has been raised before, so I thought I'd take the time to respond to it. Seriously, I don't hate the books, and I don't hate Harry Potter. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 19:03:15 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 19:03:15 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151840 Sridhar wrote: > > Was James already a target? Did LV think he was doing Snape a favor by killing James and leaving Snape to woo Lily (since he is convinced Snape is on his side and he knows Snape and James hate each other)? He is already convinced that Harry is the threat. > > I am as confused as you, probably more. > > Sridhar, who wonders if he is Professor Lockhardt. Carol responds: Well, first, I'm pretty sure that you're not Professor Lockhart or you'd be in St. Mungo's practicing "linked-up writing" or whatever he calls it and autographing moving photos of yourself without quite knowing why. Regarding the confusion, if you take Snape out of the picture, there isn't any, or at least, not much. As you say, Harry is the threat, the Prophecy Boy who can vanquish LV at some future point and must therefore, in his view, be destroyed. What other motive does Voldemort need (except perhaps the additional intention of creating a Horcrux with the soul bit from this highly significant murder)? James comes at him, armed and dangerous, and "has" to die, but Lily, apparently unarmed, merely stands in his way. Rather than waste time and energy fighting her, he orders her out of his way. The "silly girl" doesn't get it; all she has to do is allow him to accomplish his objective and she can live. (Why doesn't she stop screaming and sobbing and just move? he wonders. Doesn't she value her own life?) HBP!Harry, under the influence of Felix Felicis and therefore more likely than usual to be correct in his inferences, tells Slughorn succinctly, "He [Voldemort] told her to get out of the way. He told me she needn't have died. *He only wanted me. She could have run*" (HBP Am. ed. 489, my italics). James, OTOH, couldn't run. He had to fight Voldemort to give Lily a chance to escape with Harry. Since Lily and James thought until that moment that they were safe because of the Fidelius Charm, I would guess that Lily happened not to have her wand with her (possibly another reason why her situation was unique or at least highly unusual?) and couldn't fight, so she blocked Voldemort's path and offered her own life in exchange for Harry's instead. And Voldemort, underestimating both her strength of character (probably because of his own mother) and the power of love (again probably because of Merope) gave the "silly girl" a chance to "stand aside" and escape death because he didn't care about her; he only wanted to thwart the Prophecy and assure his immortality by killing Harry. IOW, James posed a threat and therefore "had" to die in LV's view even though he wasn't the Prophecy Boy; Lily *seemed* to pose no threat and therefore could have lived if she had only stood aside (which of course she would not have done, but LV doesn't understand that). LV expected her to be weak like Merope, a "silly girl" (and a Muggleborn to boot--note Diary!Tom's comparison of her to his father in CoS and and Voldemort's similar comparison in GoF). He underestimated the power of a mother's love because his own mother hadn't loved him enough to retain her magic and live (and perhaps also the strength of character of Muggleborns because his Muggle father had deserted him). In psychological terms, LV (it seems to me) is projecting the deficiencies of both his parents onto Lily, the Muggleborn mother, but not onto James, the pureblood father who is prepared to fight him to the death (and receives the "honor" of dying in battle as a consequence--note LV's tribute to his fallen enemy in GoF--James, he says, died fighting like a man). And yet it's Lily's death, the willing sacrifice of her own life to save Harry's (as opposed to an armed duel which can only postpone Harry's death, not save his life) that activates the ancient magic. That part, to me, is simple (whether or not you accept my explanation of LV's motivation). Lily could have lived by standing aside; James was offered that option. As I've already stated upthread, it's only the way in which Lily's sacrifice differs from what any other mother would have done under the circumstances that I find confusing, and the important question (IMO) is not why Lily could have lived but how her sacrifice activated the ancient magic. At any rate, why not trust Harry's simple synopsis, which explains Voldemort's motives quite simply without bringing Snape into the picture? If we do that, and simultaneously consider what DD says about LV constantly underestimating the power of love, we have our explanation of why Lily didn't have to die (she was an obstacle, not a threat) but James (who was a threat, not an obstacle) did. (Snape's motives for joining Dumbledore don't need to be brought in here; he "returned to our side" more than two months *before* Godric's Hollow, and he was at Hogwarts when the Potters were killed.) Carol, noting that the desire to complicate Voldemort's motives seems to stem from a desire to implicate Snape in some way From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Wed May 3 19:15:22 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 15:15:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] STATE OF CONFUSION! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503191522.81150.qmail@web37213.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151841 Nyx wrote: Hi Everyone - I am brand new on the group - but not new to the Harry Potter Mania. Catherine: Welcome to the group! Nyx: I was wondering if anyone could clear up some confusion. It's been quite some time since I finished reading the 6th book where Dumbledore gets killed. A friend of mine told me that it was Harry that was supposed to be killed - but Dumbledore made a deal with Snape to kill him instead of Harry. I don't recall reading this in the book. Did I miss something? Thanks Nyx Catherine again: No, DD was Draco's target from the beginning. If it had been Harry the target in HBP then Draco could have off'd him in the train after he Petrificus Totalised him. Voldemort wants to kill Harry himself. It would take the fun out of it if someone else did it! Catherine (whose husband STILL thinks that Harry said "abra cadabra" at some point and thinks all of us are wrong. Sigh....) --------------------------------- Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From meriaugust at yahoo.com Wed May 3 19:44:46 2006 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 19:44:46 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151842 Snipping PotionCat's summary - > 1.The strange mist, which we know is due to Dementors breeding, is so > thick the Trio has trouble finding the Greenhouse. It's mentioned > very casually. Do you think it's important? Could it contribute to > any of the emotions we see in the next few chapters? Meri now - This is an interesting correllation; I think the increased presence of the Dementors do in fact have a huge affect on the atmosphere of the book. The whole mood of the WW is down and relations at Hogwarts seemed a little strained this year. We know Azkaban Prison is located on a cold grey island in the North Sea. Maybe the dementors contributed to that, too (and maybe the weather is a little better up there than it used to be). snip > 6. Do you think Malfoy had to "bribe" Harper to play? Does Harper > know Malfoy is up to something? Meri - Malfoy can fake ill like nobody's business (remember the PoA arm slashing incident?) so I would assume that he's just faking sick again. The bribe crack was probably just a good way to distract Harper without bringing up his parentage or some other offense. What I want to know is why Gryffindor never had a reserve seeker, for all those times that Harry ended up in hospital. > 7. Zacharias Smith is pretty petty in this scene. Do you think he is > related to Hepzibah Smith? How are they alike? Meri - Smith is a pretty common last name (and remember the Evans incident), but the fact that they're both Hufflepuffs at least gives us another clue. I would make the tentative assumption that they're related distantly, and he or his family might have some useful information about the Hufflepuff cup. Perhaps his and Harry's enimity has been set up to force Harry to have to deal with him and ask him for help in the horcrux hunt. > 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? If McGonagall was there, > why wasn't she giving Smith what for? Meri - Hilarious. And I suppose that McGonagall wasn't in charge of the commentary since Smith was a Hufflepuff. Perhaps Prof. Sprout was in charge (as McGonagall was when Lee Jordan of Gryffindor comentated). > 9. We don't hear anything about the Snape-McGonagall Quidditch > rivalry anymore. JKR has said she's glad to have written the last > Quidditch game. Did JKR tire of the rivalry too? Do the two > professors have more important things on their minds? Do you miss the > rivalry? Meri - I concur with those that think that there are more important things on the minds of the staff, especially with Snape and his secret missions. I personally always liked the Quidditch scenes (because they served as a touchstone to the regular existence of a witch or wizard) and though that they provided a nice way for Harry and company to have a little fun. But now that the war is basically on and there might not even be any more Hogwarts I can see that this is the time for Quidditch to go away. Book seven is going to be a very serious novel, and I wouldn't expect much levity along the way. > 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened > two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who > admires him? Meri - Ron and Hermione have a long history together and (as anyone who had a long history with someone knows) it is always possible to bring up old hurts and arguments when you're feuding with someone. (How many times I have seen my parents bring up an argument from five years ago when they're really going at it?) And the fact that Krum was older, more popular, more talented at Quidditch, as well as a personal idol/hero of Ron's, couldn't have helped Ron's acceptance of the whole thing. But as to whether or not Ron is using Lavender, I don't really agree with that interpretation. It's just a physical thing, a little crush/fling, the kind that we all have when we're that age. > 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. > That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing > we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. > What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about > love? Meri - I thought this scene was played more for comic releif than anything. But then again it might show that Hermione has her pride. If Ron can stoop to snogging Lavender Brown then Hermione can stoop to physical violence. Meri - great job potioncat! From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 3 20:13:07 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 20:13:07 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060503112104.97072.qmail@web61325.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151844 > Joe: > Exactly what were the rules for the Tri-Wizard Tournament? I don't remember a list of them being handed out in GOF. a_svirn: Rules don't invariably exist in the written form, though. Bagman explained the tasks clearly enough. > Joe: I know the goal sounded simple, rescue what you would miss most but I am assuming that their is a whole list of rules about the tournament otherwise you could do anything to win a_svirn: You mean there was a list of rules, known only to the referees, but not to combatants? That's lovely. Do you think champions knew about this secret list? Probably not. No sane person would agree to participate under such circumstances. But are you even sure that all referees were in on the secret? It seems that Dumbledore was the only one who knew all the rules. Probably because he was in the habit of inventing them ad hoc. > Joe: and since we know you can cheat in the tourney then there must have been other rules. a_svirn: Don't you think that there is a certain contradiction of terms in this statement? If you can cheat, then there are no rules at all. Total anarchy. Which is exactly my point. Everyone seems to be cheating in this tournament from champions to referees. But I'd say in referees it's much more reprehensible behavior. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed May 3 20:12:59 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 20:12:59 -0000 Subject: The Validity of Various Topics (was:Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151845 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > >>Geoff: > > > > A little while ago, I commented on another thread that I was > > getting a trifle annoyed with the polarised stands being adopted > > by some members of the group. On the one hand, we seem to have a > > few contributors who are out to "get" Harry for everything and > > refuse to see anything admirable or constructive in his behaviour > > and on the other, those who cannot see him ever stepping out of > > line. I sometime wonder why the first group don't go off and start > > the IHHPFGU group (I hate Harry potter for Grown-ups). I think the > > working majority of us hopefully lie between the two. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Since I have a sneaking suspicion you'd put me in that former > catagory, I'd like to defend my membership on this list. I *do* > actually like Harry. It is possible (believe it or not ) to like > the boy and still have problems with how he sees things or even with > how he's treated. > > I think it's possible to like the books and see various ethical and > philosophical issues raised within the books that, yes, can lead to > some rather polarized positions. In fact, I tend to like books that > raise such issues. > > I personally think JKR is playing a bit of a sly game with Slytherin > and that they will be shown to not be the source of all that's wrong > in the WW. In fact, I'd go further and say that the scapegoating of > Slytherin is a key to what is actually wrong in the WW. So, in > putting forth such arguments I feel that I'm actually backing the > author. Others, of course, disagree. And that's perfectly fine, > IMO. > > I do see some ways that JKR's philosophy is not my own. I'm rather > afraid that she approves of the twins, for example. But I don't > think that means that I can't share my views on the matter. That's > what good books do. They get you thinking. And adults should be > able to share their various and even conflicting thoughts with each > other. Without suggestions being made that they leave the club- > house. > > Betsy Hp > > P.S. I'm not sure this was your point at all Geoff, so please don't > take this as a personal attack. But this view has been raised > before, so I thought I'd take the time to respond to it. Seriously, > I don't hate the books, and I don't hate Harry Potter. Geoff: My diatribe was directed at members who think that Harry is just completely useless and has only achieved results by riding on the back of better people. There are some members who take this line and bridle at any objections to their views and can be quite abrasive in their postings. In the Real World, Harry would be smacking their wrists as a bare minimum punishment. I wasn't suggesting that they leave the clubhouse except that they seem unhappy and disorientated - oxygen starvation perhaps..... The cut and thrust of swordplay on the group is usually quite exhilarating; what I do dislike is when somebody wields a damned great double-handed claymore instead of the regulation rapier...... :-) '"I am not joking, Mr.Weasley," he said, "though, now you mention it, I did hear an excellent one over the summer about a troll, a hag and a leprechaun who all go into a bar -" Professor McGonagall cleared her throat loudly. "Er - but maybe this is not the time... no..." said Dumbledore.' (GOF "The Triwizard Tournament" p.165 UK edition) From silmariel at telefonica.net Wed May 3 20:53:40 2006 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 22:53:40 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Slytherin House WAS: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060503123917.67468.qmail@web61312.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060503123917.67468.qmail@web61312.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200605032253.41055.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 151846 > Silmariel: I think they're not so bad as the Slytherin legend has made > them. As a whole House, of course. Even Draco, till HBP, was pretty > pathetic as a villain. Too much ado about nothing. 'Cause Harry always > wins. > Joe: > So it's okay Malfoy to be horrible as long as he's a complete moron at it? > Sorry but just because you stink at being a racist bully doesn't make it > okay. Silmariel: Huh? Ah, you are talking of real life. Pathetic, as a villain. Lame. Moron. Uneffective. Lowering the hero's value by not being a challenge. A bore. A mere annoyance. Not dangerous. Too much ado about nothing. He sucks at being a villain, yes. He's not even a killer in cold face. And he is laughable, he never wins. How I wish he'd be better at being a Baddie. > Silmariel: > JKR: But they're not all - don't think I don't take your point, but - we, > the reader, and I as the writer, because I'm leading you all there - you > are seeing Slytherin house always from the perspective of Death Eaters' > children. *They are a _small_fraction_ of the total Slytherin population* > (emphasis mine, silmariel). I'm not saying all the other Slytherins are > adorable... > > Joe: > What she is saying is that they can be rotten people and not be evil. Silmariel: No, she's saying everything is needed to keep the harmony, including Slytherin caracteristics, and the problem is fragmentation. I love the 'because I'm leading you all there' - not all, not all. > Silmariel: > Now, to be fair, I don't see Draco as a bully for his interactions with the > trio, maybe for Neville, but yes for this: > > "A short distance away, Draco Malfoy, followed by a small gang of cronies > including Crabble, Goyle and Pansy Parkinson, was pushing some > timid-looking second years out of the way so that he and his friends could > get a coach to themselves." OoP - ch 10 Luna Lovegood > Joe: > Exactly why isn't it bullying when Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle? Can you only > try to bully some people? No offense but that doesn't make any sense at > all. Literary wise, yes, it is a matter of opinion to see them as bullies or as antagonists. Been there, done that, we have countless threads on Draco/Harry. But I'm not used to see in the discussions the piece of canon I provided, so it could be a new aspect, like rain in the desert. Silmariel From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 21:04:04 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 21:04:04 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <6DE8E652-B91A-4DBB-B8AD-2663D6004734@alltel.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151847 > >>kchuplis: > But what exactly is Harry supposed to do to avoid help? Stick his > fingers in his ears and say "LALALA I can't hear you!"? This makes > no sense to me to damn Harry with faint praise because he feels > guilty that people are forcing (yes, forcing) help on him. He does > not actively seek out help. > Betsy Hp: I'm not daming Harry with faint praise. Actually, I'm giving him quite a bit of praise. He's uncomfortable with the level of help he's getting. That's an amazingly good thing. Harry doesn't like cheating. Fake!Moody cheats Harry to the cup anyway. That makes Fake!Moody the bad guy. (Though I'll point out that Harry does do the "lalala, I can't hear you" thing with Bagman. So that was an option. ) I'll say it again, Harry shows an amazing amount of personal strength (character if you will) in the fact that he doesn't become a James Jr. strutting about the school like he owns it. It's *Harry's* strength that prevents that from happening. > >>kchuplis: > The judges behaving badly means the champions don't have an > opportunity to show good sportsmanship? I don't get that. The > champions all DID show sportsmanship. How were they prevented? > Please give an instance of them being bad sports. Betsy Hp: In the water event Harry made a choice that cost him the race. He didn't protest that it was really scary down there, etc. He was willing to be a good sport and live with losing the water event. And the judges took that moment away from him and made his sacrifice of no account. They made it a gimmick. It would have changed very little to have had Harry live with the fact that his choice cost him winning that particular race. It wouldn't have killed him, and Fake!Moody would have cheated him to the cup in the end anyway. So the plot wouldn't have been messed up. But it would have made Harry's noble decision a noble decision, instead of a cutsie way of trying to give Harry his cake and have him eat it too. There's a moment in OotP when Harry is confronting his somewhat ugly feelings when Ron gets the Prefect Badge. I loved that moment. It showed Harry thinking through some very real and tempting feelings of jealousy and entitlement. He even brings up the fact that he's suffered, faced things Ron hasn't had to face. I loved how Harry had the guts and the honesty to face his uglier emotions and wrestle with them and get to a point where he really does feel good about Ron being Prefect. But then, Dumbledore takes that moment away. Turns out Harry's uglier emotions were right. He *is* better than Ron, and he really *should* have gotten the badge. So all that thinking Harry did at the beginning of the book is moot. He is the best, he is entitled, but thank you very much for playing. (Again, it's amazing and shows a real core strength that Harry isn't adversly effected by this sort of thing.) > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Though JKR does step in and makes sure Harry's team wins at > > quidditch. Again. > >>kchuplis: > Oh curses. How dare she. Betsy Hp: Well, it's a bit boring. Which is a bit of curse, I guess. And it's not that it's bad that Harry is an amazing quidditch player. I'm not arguing for mediocrity at all. Actually, I think it's a nice touchstone for Harry's character. He's an amazing flyer, and it's all his, not a hand-me-down from Voldemort. It's one thing in the Triwizard Tournament that is all his, too. Harry learned the Accio spell with good old fashioned hard work. And he totally earned the points he received. (With the bonus of being a good sport and making sure Cedric was on even footing with everyone else.) But it does bother me that Harry has to win any competition he enters. If he'd lost the water event, if his team had lost the quidditch championship, it would have been more interesting. It wouldn't have effected the over-arching plot at all, but it would have given Harry a bit more character depth to play with, IMO. Plus, there'd have been the added bonus of not being predictable. > >>kchuplis: > > Can you cite some really supportive evidence (aside from Colin) > where Harry is unduly loved and revered by students?) Betsy Hp: There's the "we got Potter!" chant when he gets sorted into Gryffindor in PS/SS. There's Flitwick's fainting in PS/SS and Lockheart's glomping (and dare I say squeeing? ) in CoS. There's the many girls asking him to the Yule Ball in GoF. There's the hostility towards Hermione for "playing with his heart" in GoF (though that speaks more to his popularity throughout the WW). There's the size of the DA club in OotP. And there's Romalda Vane and her crew in HBP. > >>kchuplis: > I think Harry is more than pointed at. He is often cut dead. > That's a Big Thing with anyone, let alone kids. > Betsy Hp: In PS/SS Harry is cut dead after he loses all those points for smuggling Norbert. But that never happens again. Sure the Hufflepuff mafia goes sour on him for a few months in CoS, but they're Hufflepuffs, and the Gryffindors have his back. And yes, the other houses are less than pleased when Harry's named a Champion in the Triwizard Tournament, but again, Gryffindor is all over him. (It's the loss of Ron that hurts Harry there.) So, no I don't think Harry does suffer out and out ostracism (except for PS/SS). Yeah there are some students that are against him, but there are always other students for him. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Evil killed his parents. I'm not sure how this shows moral > > fiber on Harry's part. I mean, yes it's good to reject evil, > > but it's not like it was a hard call on Harry's part. > >>kchuplis: > It is though. He could have thrown his lot in with say Draco and > had a much easier time of it through school. Betsy Hp: How? How would befriending Draco have made Harry's life easier at school? What on earth could Draco offer Harry that Harry doesn't already have? > >>kchuplis: > He could have accepted LV's first invitation. Betsy Hp: What invitation? > >>kchuplis: > > Usually evil is a bit tempting. Maybe it isn't hard to reject, > but that does come with a lot of pain much of the time. > Betsy Hp: I guess I don't see any time in the books where Harry could have chosen (or was even offered a chance to) follow Voldemort. I don't recall Harry ever being tempted, ever considering, joining Voldemort's side. I mean, yes that's a common path in the good vs. evil story line. But it's not one Harry has had to face. (I'm betting Snape is going to provide that part of the story line. Or possibly Draco. Maybe both?) And honestly, I'm not sure what Voldemort could have offered. Even more fame? A really super duper win? I mean, Harry has it all when it comes to that sort of stuff. The only thing I can think of is if Voldemort tried to claim he could bring back Sirius or the Potters or something. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Who dislikes Hermione? And for that matter, who dislikes > > Hagrid? > >>kchuplis: > Errr. Didn't we just have a billion threads on how Hermione > doesn't have any girlfriends supposedly? Betsy Hp: Hermione doesn't have a best girlfriend. But I'm not sure how that makes Harry being her friend some sort of moral choice on his part. Hermione isn't *hated* by her female peers. She's just not their best bud. She doesn't want to be. But that doesn't make her or her friends social lepers by any means. > >>kchuplis: > > Also, I believe he spends most of OoTP calling people to carpet on > Hagrid. He defends Hagrid immediately to Draco in SS/PS. He stands > by him no matter what. Betsy Hp: Except when it comes to actually taking Hagrid's class. But, again, I'm not seeing a moral choice here. Befriending Hagrid doesn't cost Harry anything. > >>Betsy HP: > > He's good, his friends are good, his enemies are bad, > >>kchuplis: > I'd say his enemies are a bit more than "bad". But that's just me. Betsy Hp: Exactly! See, it's *easy* for Harry. Compare that with say, Draco, who, if he does choose to side with Dumbledore will be going against his parents. Now *that's* a difficult decision. Siding with people you like against people you don't is not a hard call to make. Actually, that's a really good reason for Snape to be DDM. Because than Harry will have to put his cause ahead of his personal issues. Betsy Hp From orgone9 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 20:30:35 2006 From: orgone9 at yahoo.com (Len Jaffe) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 13:30:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503203035.4508.qmail@web80606.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151848 a_svirn said: Don't you think that there is a certain contradiction of terms in this statement? If you can cheat, then there are no rules at all. Len npw: Nope. Not contradictory at all. Cheat (verb) To violate rules deliberately, as in a game: *was accused of cheating at cards.* You have to have rules to cheat. Len. Pedantic, but not in the true sense of the word. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 22:00:58 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 22:00:58 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151849 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, Chapter > 14, Felix Felicis > > 1.The strange mist, which we know is due to Dementors breeding, is so thick the Trio has trouble finding the Greenhouse. It's mentioned very casually. Do you think it's important? Could it contribute to any of the emotions we see in the next few chapters? Carol: Interesting question, and you're right that casually mentioned tidbits usually prove important. And yet in this instance, the emotions of the characters have other explanations, including general immaturity and inexperience in handling hormonal urges. Possibly the mist contributes to or intensifies certain emotions or mental states, such as Ron's lack of self-confidence, but I don't see anything resembling the depression that Dementors generally stand for; no one's happiness is being sucked away. I think it's more of an ominous foreshadowing, reminding us that the world outside Hogwarts is getting darker and more dangerous (rather like the hands on Mrs. Weasley's clock, now pointing uselessly to "mortal peril"). > > 2. The Snargaluff scene is very well described for something that is > unimportant. It seems a mixture of the Devil's Snare episode from > SS/PS, having dental work done, and a character from "Winnie the > Pooh." Is this just more scenery? Carol: You must be thinking of Heffalumps. I thought of Snuffleupagus from "Sesame Street." I don't think that Snargaluff pods will prove important lately, but the students needed to be doing something colorful and mildly dangerous to keep them occupied during class. I think the Snargaluffs just provide color and humor, in keeping with what sixth-years would be learning in Herbology at this point. (I could be wrong, of course, but I'm still waiting for Mimbulus Mimbletonia to be something more than a password.) > > 3.Harry makes some difficult decisions as a Quidditch captain. In > what ways has he grown? Carol responds: I think he does a much better job handling McLaggen than he does dealing with Zacharias Smith in the DA, but of course Quidditch is much less personal (and deadly) than the events in the graveyard that he doesn't want to talk about in OoP. I think he's finally developing some "people skills"--knowing when to compliment a person (e.g., Demelza), when and how to stand up to them and assert his authority (McLaggen), and even how to handle Ron's moodiness and lack of confidence without damaging their friendship ("Ron, you're my best mate, but--"). I think that, for the first time, he feels confident in his leadership abilities (thanks to the DA), and his experiences with the Daily Prophet and the fickleness of public opinion have made him virtually immune to unpopularity. Unlike Ron, he no longer cares what people think of him as long as he has his two best friends (who are somewhat harder to manage than his Quidditch team in terms of their friendship with each other). > > 4. The Slytherin team members are Urquhart, Harper and Vaisey. Any > thoughts on those names and what they might mean, or what images they conjure? How do they compare to the names of the Gryffindor beaters Peakes and Coote? Carol: I hadn't thought about the names at all. However, Harper seems like a clone of Draco both in personality (sneering contempt for blood traitors, etc.) and skill at Quidditch; if Harry hadn't distracted him by implying that Draco had bribed him to take his place, Harper would have caught the Snitch. (Luck and/or cunning on Harry's part!). And Urquhart seems like the usual hand-crushing lout of a Slytherin captain. Vaisey isn't mentioned; apparently he's a skilled player whose absence gives Gryffindor an advantage. Peakes and Coote seem to be adequate replacements for the Twins and one of them (Peakes) shows some spunk, standing up to McLaggen despite his size. And McLaggen, whom you don't mention, seems to epitomize the worst qualities of Gryffindor. Nice to have an unpleasant Gryffindor for a change (along with Romilda Vane), to balance out the houses a little. > > 5. Many Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs had taken sides. Does this give the impression that Slytherin House is not universally disliked? It sounds as if the individuals within the two houses had taken sides, not that one house was pulling for one team. What does this mean? Carol: I agree with you that it sounds as if it's no longer Slytherin against the world, maybe in part because Slughorn's Slug Club contains non-Slytherins and he's perfectly willing to hand out points to Gryffindor (and presumably to other houses)? Or maybe, as JKR hinted, there are DE's children in other Houses who would support Slytherin on principle against Gryffindor? I really don't know, but any lessening of anti-Slytherin prejudice indicated by this scene will be seriously undermined, IMO, by the events on the tower. (If Hogwarts is still open, will Crabbe, Goyle, and Theo Nott come back to school for their seventh year? Draco almost certainly won't.) > > 6. Do you think Malfoy had to "bribe" Harper to play? Does Harper know Malfoy is up to something? Carol: I think that Harper is a good player himself and leaped at the chance to play, no bribe necessary--unless, as a good Slytherin, he took advantage of Draco's desperation and demanded either galleons or the use of Draco's broom. But I doubt that he has any clue what Draco is up to. He probably takes him at his word that he's ill. > > 7. Zacharias Smith is pretty petty in this scene. Do you think he is related to Hepzibah Smith? How are they alike? Carol: I think we have a teeny bit more of JKR's attempts to unstereotype the houses here; an unpleasant Hufflepuff as opposed to nice but pompous Ernie and sportsmanlike, all-around-good-guy Cedric. Smith, of course, is an extremely common name, but the Hufflepuff connection is unlikely to be accidental, and his father (briefly mentioned near the end of the book) strikes me as an arrogant pureblood very much aware of his lineage (an attitude that isn't confined to Slytherin). So, yes, I'm sure there's a connection and that we haven't been introduced to Zacharias for nothing. I'm sure that he and Harry will somehow come to terms and that he'll be connected to the hunt for the Hufflepuff Horcrux in some way. I don't see any resemblance between him and Hepzibah, however; she seems empty-headed, vain, and frivolous, not to mention unsuspicious, whereas Zacharias is rather bright and observant and not afraid to voice his suspicions in OoP. How he got placed in Hufflepuff is unclear to me; maybe his family, like the young Sirius Black, rejects Dark magic and Death Eaters without abandoning the arrogance that seems tied in with their pureblood heritage (and their link to Helga Hufflepuff). > > 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? If McGonagall was there, why wasn't she giving Smith what for? Carol: I don't think that Zacharias's commentary was any more blatantly biased than Lee Jordan's, and he does at least know Quidditch. (In fact, Harry wouldn't have known that Harper had seen the Snitch if Zacharias hadn't pointed it out.) Possibly, McGonagall is holding her impatience in check so that she won't appear to be favoring Gryffindor over Slytherin (which, of course, she is). After all, she has it in her power to choose another commentator for future games, even those in which Zach isn't playing. As for Ginny, I don't think her retaliation is any worse than what Wood or the Twins might have done. If Zacharias were a Muggle, he'd have been hurt, but since he's a wizard all he received was public humiliation and maybe a few scratches. I suppose that JKR intended it to be funny, and it's certainly in character for Ginny (who earlier hit Zacharias with her Bat-Bogey Hex), but it doesn't add to my fondness for or admiration of Ginny. I guess she's our substitute in HBP for the Twins, but all she does is argue with Ron, switch boyfriends when they annoy her, and retaliate against people she doesn't like. Maybe she's supposed to remind people of Lily with her red hair and her cheek, but she reminds me more of James, hexing anyone who annoyed him just because he could. > > 9. We don't hear anything about the Snape-McGonagall Quidditch rivalry anymore. JKR has said she's glad to have written the last Quidditch game. Did JKR tire of the rivalry too? Do the two professors have more important things on their minds? Do you miss the rivalry? Carol: I don't care for Quidditch, but I miss the Snape/McGonagall interaction. I'm not sure that McGonagall had anything more on her mind than the usual school duties, including those of assistant headmistress. Snape, however, had Draco Malfoy's mission and his own UV to worry about, and though he does mention Quidditch to Harry in a later chapter, I'm sure it's the least of his concerns. > > 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who admires him? Carol: I think Ron is using the Krum/Hermione "snogging" (which may not even have occurred) as an excuse to be mad at her because he's still so confused about his own feelings (and self-conscious about his own inexperience). We don't see into his mind, but I'm sure he's being bitten by the same green-eyed monster that attacks Harry when he sees Ginny kissing Dean, only Ron has less control of his feelings than Harry does, and less self-confidence in general. I don't think he's using Lavender, exactly; she's the one who initiates the relationship (if it can be called by that term) and she certainly doesn't mind being publicly "snogged." So, yes, I think he needs someone who likes him and finds him attractive, and he certainly doesn't mind having Hermione see that someone else likes him (which probably evens out the Hermione/Krum attraction in his mind). Ron is a kid, clumsily making his way through adolescence with no adult guidance, and Hermione isn't helping matters by doubting his Quidditch abilities (thinking that he could not have made those saves without Felix Felicis) or angrily attacking him with her conjured birds. (I know; she's a kid, too, but she's more aware of her feelings than he is, and ought, maybe, to help him out.) Anyway, I like Ron and trust him to come to his senses once he understands that Hermione really does like him as more than a friend. > > 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about love? Carol: We've known for quite awhile that Hermione likes to get revenge (Rita Skeeter and Umbridge come to mind), but this is the first instance I can recall in which she uses her own magical abilities against someone who can't match them and actually physically hurts someone she cares about. I suppose the violence of her reaction indicates the strength of her feelings and the intensity of the emotional pain she's feeling in response to Ron and Lavender (her turn to feel what Ron felt with Hermione and Viktor?) as well as bewilderment at his reaction to the phony Felix incident. Hermione's intellectual development is ahead of her emotional maturity, and at this point she loses control in her anger and frustration. Quite possibly JKR is making a statement about teenage hormones and the different ways in which boys and girls mature, but I think the problem has more to do with their individual temperaments and upbringing than with love in general. Certainly the boarding school environment has something to do with it; teenagers of both sexes sharing a common room with no adult supervision, the only control being the spell that prevents boys from entering the girls' dormitory (but not vice versa). If this weren't a children's series, I'm afraid we'd see more than "snogging" under such circumstances. (Sorry to ignore the part of the question about the birds, but I can't think of any symbolism except that the seemingly innocent creatures turn vicious at Hermione's command. Wonder how Ron got free of them.) > > 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? Carol: She did, indeed. Very sneaky the way she makes us think that we know Harry's plan. Sad to say, I'm pretty sure that I fell for it just as Ron did. I certainly didn't anticipate the flare-up when Ron realized that it was his own skill, which both Hermione and he had doubted, rather than the potion that enabled him to make those saves. Immature and hypocritical on his part, maybe, but unwise on Hermione's to express her doubts in front of him. And Harry may have learned a lesson, too, as he watched his seeming well-laid plan gang aglay. > > 13. "Felix Felicis" is the title of the chapter. What part did the potion really play? Does this tell us anything about the potion or was it just part of the set up? Carol: I think the potion was more of a plot device than anything, setting us up to have the rug pulled out from under us, bringing about the conflict between Ron and Hermione, and foreshadowing the chapter(s) in which the potion is actually used. Watching Ron through Harry's eyes, we get an idea of the effects of the potion. We also understand why it's banned in sporting competitions and get into the ethical questions that permeate the book ("Hark who's talking," Harry says to Hermione, reminding her that she confunded McLaggen to help Ron get on the team). And there's the general question of the uses to which Harry is putting the Prince's book, notably winning the Felix potion in the first place without having a clue as to Golpalott's Law and its applications. So I'd say that, while the potion isn't actually used, it nevertheless plays an important thematic role as well as being an essential plot element. > > 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." Was > Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can you > think of other chapters that may have been written like this? I agree with you that "Snape's Worst Memory" comes under more suspicion as an accurate chapter title thanks to "Felix Felicis," and I would note that the narration of the chapter (sly hints designed to make us think one thing while concealing what's really going on) should alert us to the unreliable narrator technique elsewhere in the book. (No wonder JKR handles Snape so well; she's a master [make that "mistress"] of half-truths and subtle misdirection herself, as is our beloved "epitome of goodness," Dumbledore.) As for other chapter titles that might be similarly misleading, how about "Snape Victorious," in which Snape seems to be achieving a long-cherished ambition but is in fact being publicly acknowledged as the latest appointee to a jinxed, or perhaps cursed, position that ultimately leads to disaster for him and for Hogwarts? > > Potioncat, who would like to thank Penapart_Elf and Carol for > suggestions and encouragement. You're welcome. Thanks to you and Penapart_Elf for getting the discussions up and running again! Carol, whose discussion of chapter 15 just needs a bit of tightening and should be ready within a week From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 22:16:22 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 22:16:22 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151850 > >>Potioncat: > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, > Chapter 14, Felix Felicis > > Felix Felicis Questions: > 1.The strange mist, which we know is due to Dementors breeding, is > so thick the Trio has trouble finding the Greenhouse. It's > mentioned very casually. Do you think it's important? Could it > contribute to any of the emotions we see in the next few chapters? Betsy Hp: I never noticed the mist before! It must mean something since it's described as odd, but I'm not sure if it does add to emotions or not. A lot of the stuff in this chapter has been building for a while, IMO. (Though I did find Ginny's anger a bit over the top.) > 2. The Snargaluff scene is very well described for something that > is unimportant. It seems a mixture of the Devil's Snare episode > from SS/PS, having dental work done, and a character from "Winnie > the Pooh." Is this just more scenery? Betsy Hp: I'm no good at picking out objects that will be important later on. I did love the atmosphere the Snargaluff gave the trio's conversation. And I loved super-competent!Neville. > 3.Harry makes some difficult decisions as a Quidditch captain. In > what ways has he grown? Betsy Hp: We get more of Harry's leadership abilities (so well demonstrated in the DA club in OotP) in the way he handles his people and his willingness to make a hard decision (Dean vs. Seamus). Though we do get a hint that he's not fully grown up with his "Must. Beat. DRACO" moment, that I found entirely too cute. [Skipping 4, because I've no idea.] > 5. Many Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs had taken sides. Does this give > the impression that Slytherin House is not universally disliked? > It sounds as if the individuals within the two houses had taken > sides, not that one house was pulling for one team. What does this > mean? Betsy Hp: I guess it means that Slytherins aren't all evil, rotten, no-good cheaters. And I think it shows that the real division is between Gryffindor and Slytherin, with Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw singing back up for the which ever flavor they prefer on that particular day. (Which makes sense, I think, since Slytherin and Gryffindor were such fast friends, per the Sorting Hat. Plus, you know, fire/water.) > 6. Do you think Malfoy had to "bribe" Harper to play? Does Harper > know Malfoy is up to something? Betsy Hp: Various members of Slytherin may know something is up with Draco (Pansy and Blaise, especially), but Ginny tells us that Harper is an idiot. So I don't know if he'd be one to put things together. His double-take with Harry suggests to me that Draco *did* bribe him. Though I'm not sure why it would have been neccessary. Maybe to try and avoid questions? After all, Draco is trying to keep his activities quiet. > 7. Zacharias Smith is pretty petty in this scene. Do you think he > is related to Hepzibah Smith? How are they alike? Betsy Hp: They're blond Hufflepuffs with Old Testament names and the last name of Smith. It seems like a pretty close match, IMO. And Zacharias made me laugh. His commentary wasn't any worse than Jordan's on any team not Gryffindor, with the added bonus of being just polite enough to avoid being called on it. (Clever boy. ) > 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? Betsy Hp: My goodness but she's an angry young lady. I'm not sure what set her off so badly. I don't recall Flint ramming Jordan after a match. Nothing Zacharius said seemed to need a physical retaliation, IMO. > If McGonagall was there, why wasn't she giving Smith what for? Betsy Hp: Because Zacharius was careful. He spoke of "interesting" choices based on past games and the usual athletic build of various positions. Yes, it was snide towards Gryffindor, but it wasn't name calling. (Should I mention that it was Zacharius's commentary that clued Harry into Harper spotting the snitch? Oh heck, why not. ) > 9. We don't hear anything about the Snape-McGonagall Quidditch > rivalry anymore. JKR has said she's glad to have written the last > Quidditch game. Did JKR tire of the rivalry too? Do the two > professors have more important things on their minds? Do you miss > the rivalry? Betsy Hp: I do miss it a bit. I think it was fun for the two of them, and I liked seeing Snape and McGonagall having fun. I agree with others that the times have become too serious for the usual goodhearted rivalries, and I think it's a bit sad. (Especially if Snape dies! Here's hoping they're placing bets and making snide remarks a couple of years from now.) > 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that > happened two years ago? Betsy Hp: Part of it might have been an honesty thing. Ron questioned Hermione a lot about her relationship with Krum, and she obviously kept some things from him. (I'll admit that I was surprised to find out Hermione and Krum had gotten physical. An eighteen year old boy with a fourteen year old girl creeps me out a bit.) Part of it was good old fashioned jealousy. And embarrassment that he's such an innocent (relatively speaking). > Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who admires him? Betsy Hp: I think it's all about the admiration. Lavender actually believed in Ron, and I think he needed/wanted that. > 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. > That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next > thing we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do > some damage. > What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more > about love? Betsy Hp: I don't think it tells us a thing about love. It does tell us that Hermione is a bit violent. (Ron never physically attacked Hermione for dating Krum.) Maybe that was the mist? Maybe the mist is taking perfectly nice young girls and turning them mean? Though to be fair to Hermione, she didn't realize Ginny had spilled the beans (why didn't Ginny warn her?) so she didn't realize what was going on with Ron. > 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at > breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if > Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix > Felicis in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? Betsy Hp: I *totally* believed Harry has spiked Ron's drink. I knew they'd win the game (of course), and I knew Harry had Hermione on shaky moral ground (her throwing the try-outs), but I didn't know where the friendship would end up. > 13. "Felix Felicis" is the title of the chapter. What part did the > potion really play? Does this tell us anything about the potion or > was it just part of the set up? > 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." > Was Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can > you think of other chapters that may have been written like this? Betsy Hp: It was a masterful setup on JKR's part (tips hat to JKR). I'm not sure it means that Snape's memory wasn't his worst though. Because the payoff in this chapter comes in this chapter. Whereas there's no "payoff" in the "Worst Memory" chapter. Nice discussion, Potioncat, thanks! Betsy Hp From wdcaroline at yahoo.ca Wed May 3 17:25:32 2006 From: wdcaroline at yahoo.ca (Wade Caroline) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 13:25:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Snape's memory Message-ID: <20060503172532.12774.qmail@web61222.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151851 I have a question: In OOP when HP retrieves Snape's memory of being tormented by James Potter, I wondered at the time if Snape's memory of that torment and what ACTUALLY happened would be the same. I thought JKR would be reveal later that Snape's memory was not exactly what happened, thus keeping James' image intact. Even after Sirius and Lupin admited that they were, in fact, jerks, (only teenagers after all) I remained unconvinced, because it seems to me that one's memory of what happened when one is being bullied would become embellished over the years. Am i wrong? wc From spirittalks at gmail.com Wed May 3 22:26:21 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 18:26:21 -0400 Subject: "Remember My Last" Musing References: Message-ID: <000501c66f00$9bff70d0$6401a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 151852 We discussed the communication via Howler from Dumbledore to Petunia a few days ago and I saw on her site (and it was probably discussed here) a mention of that note left with Harry on the Dursley's doorstep as the last communication between Dumbledore and Petunia. JKR went on to say that it was not the first and that there had been other communications between Dumbledore and Petunia. So I just began again with book 1 and saw this as Vernon was preparing to leave for Grunnings on page 2 of "The Sorcerer's Stone", paperback, US. "None of them noticed a large, tawny owl flutter past the window." I began to wonder if the owl was instructed to wait until Petunia was alone to deliver his message to her. There was a mention of the nation's owls acting peculiar that day and "flying in every direction since sunrise" (page 6). But that's explainable in that the whole WW was communicating back and forth that day. So could that owl that fluttered past the Dursley's window have been an early communication from Dumbledore to Petunia occuring shortly after the Godric's Hollow incident and long before Harry was left on the doorstep? Not that Petunia gave away anything to Vernon when he mentioned the Potters that evening but would she have? Well, maybe I'm off track or maybe not but I think if there were earlier communications before the note left with Harry, they would have occured that day as he probably had no reason to even care that Petunia existed prior to her sister's family's need to go into hiding. Kim From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 3 22:36:21 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 22:36:21 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060503203035.4508.qmail@web80606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151853 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Len Jaffe wrote: > > a_svirn said: > Don't you think that there is a certain > contradiction of terms in > this statement? If you can cheat, then there are no > rules at all. > > Len npw: > Nope. Not contradictory at all. > Cheat (verb) To violate rules deliberately, as in a > game: *was accused of cheating at cards.* > > You have to have rules to cheat. > a_svirn: Exactly my point. If cheating is incorporated in the rules, there are no rules left. From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Wed May 3 22:50:06 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 22:50:06 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: <20060503172532.12774.qmail@web61222.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151854 WC (Is this right?) wrote: > It seems to me that one's memory of what happened when one is being bullied would become embellished over the years. > > Am i wrong? Goddlefrood says: Afraid so, that is you are wrong. During the course of the joint Mugglenet / Leaky Cauldron Interview of July 2005 the following came out (summary from Madam Scoop's): Pensieves "recreate" the entire reality of the memory and are free of any personal interpretations or biases. Even things not initially noticed are recorded. This is self-explanatory and shows that Snape could not have embellished the memory, but that it was exactly how it happened - the greasy little ... A Bientot From julcrybor at yahoo.com Wed May 3 15:10:20 2006 From: julcrybor at yahoo.com (julcrybor) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 15:10:20 -0000 Subject: Harry a Horocrux ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151855 I have been wondering if it is possible for Harry to be a horocrux. We know one is something of Gryffindor well what if Harry IS a decendent of Gryffindor. LV went to the Potters and intended to kill Harry to make a horocrux well there might be a spell or something that you do before you kill that makes it possible to put the portion of soul that splits into something else. What if LV did that and when Lilly stood in his way and they activated the ancient magic something went wrong and his soul split and when he tried to kill Harry he transfered his soul into Harry. That would also explain the mental connection between them. Maby it is far fetched or maby not. Maby Harry would have to kill himself in the end. "julcrybor" From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 22:54:39 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 22:54:39 -0000 Subject: "Remember My Last" Musing In-Reply-To: <000501c66f00$9bff70d0$6401a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151856 Kim Wrote: "None of them noticed a large, tawny owl flutter past the window." I began to wonder if the owl was instructed to wait until Petunia was alone to deliver his message to her. Nick now: Also note that Hogwarts owls are large and tawny. This increases the likelihood that the correspondence was from Dumbledore. Nick From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Wed May 3 23:17:10 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 16:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503231710.28989.qmail@web61316.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151857 a_svirn: Don't you think that there is contradiction of terms in this statement? If you can cheat, then there are no rules at all. Total anarchy. Joe: No it isn't a contradiction at all. In fact you have to have rules to have cheating. Cheating is the breaking of rules so if you have no rules then you have no cheating. Since you could cheat in the TWT there had to be rules. All sports have rules and there is cheating in them. I think you might want to rethink that statement. Joe From inkling_rg at yahoo.com Wed May 3 23:18:50 2006 From: inkling_rg at yahoo.com (inkling_rg) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 23:18:50 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Regarding the confusion, if you take Snape out of the picture, there > isn't any, or at least, not much. As you say, Harry is the threat, the > Prophecy Boy who can vanquish LV at some future point and must > therefore, in his view, be destroyed. What other motive does Voldemort > need (except perhaps the additional intention of creating a Horcrux > with the soul bit from this highly significant murder)? James comes at > him, armed and dangerous, and "has" to die, but Lily, apparently > unarmed, merely stands in his way. Rather than waste time and energy > fighting her, he orders her out of his way. The "silly girl" doesn't > get it; all she has to do is allow him to accomplish his objective and > she can live. (Why doesn't she stop screaming and sobbing and just > move? he wonders. Doesn't she value her own life?) Inkling: I always love your posts, Carol, but this time I have to disagree. Look at what you've just written: She was an unarmed woman. How would he be wasting his time "fighting" her? An AK takes one and half seconds, significantly less than it takes to try to reason a weeping and hysterical mother into giving a maniac a clear shot at her son. Also, re: Tom Riddle's 'stand aside' to Hagrid as a parallel to what happened in Godric's Hollow. Interesting observation, but let's remember that at that stage in Tom's life, he hadn't personally killed *anyone* yet--it's no surprise that he didn't AK Hagrid in the middle of Hogwarts. But Lord Voldemort at the height of his reign of terror, giving a known Order member the chance to live, for no good reason? To see how likely *that* is, I think it's more helpful to look at that *other* example of how a fully grown, fully evil LV treats people who get in the way of his mission to kill Harry Potter-- Cedric. Cedric's also no threat, certainly as irrelevant as you believe Lily is (moreso, actually, since she was a skilled Order member who had already defied him three times)-- and what does LV do? He doesn't bumble around with offering Cedric any chances to run away or take the cup and go home--he kills him. Simple and efficient. And more or less instinctual by this point, I think. I actually think the Cedric scene was put in partly to show that offering to spare Lily did not come naturally to LV. Quite the contrary. LV's a pragmatist at heart, I think, and there was nothing pragmatic about offering Lily chance after chance to step aside-- unless there was something else in it for him. Also, there's this little interview snippet from last year: 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. In other words: Bangs imminent. And while your scenario is pretty coherent and sensible, it is not bangy. Now, for what it's worth, I do agree that this will probably be one bang that Snape has very little to do with. (I love the idea of Snape/Lily, but even I find the theory that LV offered to spare Lily as a reward for Snape to be rather boring, and too distasteful for JKR to write into the books anyway.) The more I think about it, the more I like the theory that LV wanted Lily for some unique talent or knowledge of her own-- possibly something related to her job (which we still know nothing about). But as fond as I'm getting of that theory, I have to admit that it raises the question of why LV didn't just stupify her, kill Harry, and take her back to Dark Lord Headquarters with him.... Inkling (That was an awkwardly morbid last line...) From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 3 23:40:21 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 23:40:21 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060503231710.28989.qmail@web61316.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151859 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Joe Goodwin wrote: > > > a_svirn: > Don't you think that there is contradiction of terms in this > statement? If you can cheat, then there are no rules at all. Total > anarchy. > > Joe: No it isn't a contradiction at all. In fact you have to have rules to have cheating. Cheating is the breaking of rules so if you have no rules then you have no cheating. > > Since you could cheat in the TWT there had to be rules. > > All sports have rules and there is cheating in them. I think you might want to rethink that statement. > > Joe > I'll rephrase it then. If you can "cheat in the tourney" it means that cheating is incorporated into the rules. In other words there is no difference at all between "foul and fair". a_svirn From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed May 3 23:47:06 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 23:47:06 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151860 Tonks: > Does anyone know of any custom in any culture since the beginning of time in which one person who was tried for a crime could have someone die it his place? There must have been some custom like this somewhere. Is there anything in ancient laws that allows for someone to take the place of another? We see this theme in both Lily and Harry and in Bartty Crouch Jr .and his mother. I think there are clues here if only we could figure them out. Ceridwen: Not straight across, but: The basis of Christianity for one, which I'm sure most people will be familiar with despite their own religion - the substitute sacrifice of Jesus for all sinners. Two: The lamb for Isaac in the OT. Three: Sin-eating. I don't know if this is real or if it was just an old Richard Thomas TV movie, but a person comes to a wake and eats over the dead body to take the sins of the deceased so the dead can go to heaven. Four: The scape-goat, who is loaded up with the sins of the people, then driven into the desert. Marginal: Paying someone to take one's place in the draft, go to war in one's name. I don't think that's legal now, but there used to be something at least very similar if not exact many, *many* years ago. Ceridwen. From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 00:08:56 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 17:08:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060504000856.4435.qmail@web61322.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151861 a_svirn: I'll rephrase it then. If you can "cheat in the tourney" it means that cheating is incorporated into the rules. In other words there is no difference at all between "foul and fair". Joe: But cheating wasn't incorporated in the rules. It can still be done. Let me see if I can clear this up. You think that the judges giving points is cheating even if it is in the rules(right?). By definition though if it is in the rules it isn't cheating. Since we have no idea what may or may not have been in the rules we can't just say that those points we cheating. Now as to the other other cheating episodes aside from the points give. All of the contestants got assistance from outside sources. Only in Harry's case do we know how much. Most major sports have traditions of trying to get around the rules. In many cases these are some of the most "colorful" stories in them. Still if you are caught you will be punished. We pretty much know that all of the contestants got help so there is no "fair" player to compare to the "foul" players. I still think the extra points were within the rules because no one really protested. I do agree that there was a good bit of cheating beyond those points though. Joe From wdcaroline at yahoo.ca Wed May 3 23:54:46 2006 From: wdcaroline at yahoo.ca (Wade Caroline) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 19:54:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060503235446.11811.qmail@web61216.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151862 Tonks wrote: > Does anyone know of any custom in any culture since the beginning of time in which one person who was tried for a crime could have someone die it his place? Wade: Would a whipping boy count? (Taking punishment for the prince whose royal personage could not be touched) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 01:23:03 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 01:23:03 -0000 Subject: Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151863 julcrybor wrote: > > I have been wondering if it is possible for Harry to be a horocrux. We know one is something of Gryffindor well what if Harry IS a decendent of Gryffindor. LV went to the Potters and intended to kill Harry to make a horocrux well there might be a spell or something that you do before you kill that makes it possible to put the portion of soul that splits into something else. What if LV did that and when Lilly stood in his way and they activated the ancient magic something went wrong and his soul split and when he tried to kill Harry he transfered his soul into Harry. That would also explain the mental connection between them. Maby it is far fetched or maby not. Maby Harry would have to kill himself in the end. Carol responds: As you'll find if you search the site for "Harry Horcrux" (no quotes), Harry the Horcrux is probably tied with Snape for the most popular topic since the sixth book came out. While only a few people think that Voldemort would deliberately create a human Horcrux, quite a few believe that he accidentally did so. (I don't; I think that the deflected Avada Kedavra destroyed Voldemort's body and in the process transferred some of Voldie's powers into Harry via the open cut, which was not yet a scar, but I don't think that a soul bit can be transferred that way.) Slughorn tell Tom Riddle that the soul is split by the act of murder and then the soul piece is encased in an object using a spell that he either does not know or refuses to divulge. It sounds to me as if a deliberate act is required to encase the soul in the object *after* the murder has been committed; certainly no such spell was performed at Godric's Hollow. Voldemort went right from the duel with James to the confrontation with Lily, killed her, attempted to kill Harry and was himself reduced to vapor when the spell rebounded. (I don't know what happened to his body; perhaps it exploded.) Also, your idea seems to detract somewhat from Lily's deliberate sacrifice of her life as the source of the ancient magic. Surely the protection would begin at the moment the deflected AK burst out of him and would have protected him from the great evil of becoming an accidental Horcrux. (The transfer of powers, OTOH, would give him protection and weapons that no one else has, making him uniquely capable of destroying Voldemort.) We know that these powers include Parseltongue; they may include a distinctive form of Legilimency via the scar. I predict that they also include possession, and that he will destroy Voldemort by possessing him and making Voldie wish for death (or leap through the Veil with Harry still possessing him, after which the extra soul, Harry's, would find its way back to the other side, perhaps using Sirius Black's body to transport it--and, no, that would not bring Sirius back to life, but it would at least provide his friends with a body to bury). The idea that Harry is a descendant of Gryffindor has also been suggested, in part because of the name Godric's Hollow. However, IMO, it's more likely that Dumbledore (along with his brother Albus) is the descendant of Gryffindor, which would explain why he has a Phoenix with the Gryffindor colors and why he owns Godric Gryffindor's sword. I would guess that Godric's Hollow was once his home and he proposed it as a hiding place for the Potters at the same time that he proposed the Fidelius Charm idea and offered his services as Secret Keeper. Not saying that I'm right and you're wrong, just that these points have been rather thoroughly discussed and you should be able to find plenty of threads on both sides of the Harry the Horcrux argument. Carol, fervently hoping that Harry is not a Horcrux and that he will destroy Voldemort without having to die himself From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu May 4 01:37:06 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 01:37:06 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: <20060503235446.11811.qmail@web61216.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151864 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Wade Caroline wrote: > > Tonks wrote: > > Does anyone know of any custom in any culture since the beginning of > time in which one person who was tried for a crime could have someone > die it his place? > > Wade: > > Would a whipping boy count? (Taking punishment for the prince whose royal personage could not be touched) > Ceridwen: There is a story - I don't know if it's true or not, and I don't know if it happened in Jamestown or in Plymouth during colonial times. Someone from the settlement had killed one of the Indians. It was generally acknowledged that the blacksmith had done it. But there was only one skilled blacksmith and several unskilled laborers. So there was a mock trial and one of the unskilled laborers was convicted and hung, with warriors from the tribe watching from the outskirts of the town. Christ, the Sin-Eater, someone who would join the service in someone's stead for payment, and possibly whipping boys, all took someone else's place voluntarily. The pilgrim laborer, the scape goat, the lamb stuck in the bushes, and possibly the whipping boys, didn't. (can you tell I don't know much about whipping boys?) Tonks: > We see this theme in both Lily and Harry and in Bartty Crouch Jr .and his mother. I think there are clues here if only we could figure them out. Ceridwen: It's a familiar theme, and it's something parents say - 'I wish I could take the pain for you'. It's interesting that you brought up Mrs Crouch, another mother who took her son's place. It does seem to be a theme. Do we doubt that Molly would also take the place of any of her children in danger? But, Lily didn't fight back from what we know. At least, that's how I recall it. She willingly died without a struggle, without trying to defend herself. Is that the key? There is definitely something there, but it could be weighty enough that it stands alone: willingly giving one's life for someone else, without fighting back, is heroic, and in the Potterverse, it's also magic. Ceridwen. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 01:42:46 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 01:42:46 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151865 Potioncat: > Felix Felicis Questions: Alla: You ROCK. Great questions, let me see if I can add something that was not said yet. Potioncat: 3.Harry makes some difficult decisions as a Quidditch captain. In what ways has he grown? Alla: I think this was always part of Harry's nature - to do what's "best for the team", I am not saying that he follows that perfectly, but IMO he tries. He IS still uncomfortable of hurting people that is why he corners Dean IMO. > 6. Do you think Malfoy had to "bribe" Harper to play? Does Harper > know Malfoy is up to something? Alla: Malfoy almost murdered two of his classmates in this book. What is bribery for him? IMO piece of cake. I don't know whether he resolved to bribery though, since Harper seems the "same sort" as Malfoy is, since JKR IMO hints pretty clearly that Harper shares "purebloodism" ideology. ("Your blood traitor pal") He is an episodic character, but IMO shares usual Slytherin mindset. I don't know, I speculate he can be friendly with Malfoy and play as a favor to him or not. But THANK YOU for this question, I completely forgot "your blood traitor pal" comment. It shows to me that even so tiny Slytherin characters share the same mindset. > 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened > two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who > admires him? Alla: I can just agree with those who said that Ron needs someone who admires him. "You will be brilliant, Ron" - I was SO grateful to Lavender for this comment. Thank you! Alla From elfundeb at gmail.com Thu May 4 03:11:36 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 23:11:36 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0605032011o7e94cda4vd216cda952982652@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151866 On 5/3/06, potioncat wrote: > > 4. The Slytherin team members are Urquhart, Harper and Vaisey. Any > thoughts on those names and what they might mean, or what images they > conjure? How do they compare to the names of the Gryffindor beaters > Peakes and Coote? Coots are birds which are notable for being quite awkward when attempting to walk on the ground but they are better fliers. Though Coote is described as "weedy" which doesn't exactly conjure up a coot's physique. 5. Many Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs had taken sides. Does this give > the impression that Slytherin House is not universally disliked? It > sounds as if the individuals within the two houses had taken sides, > not that one house was pulling for one team. What does this mean? To me, it means that the Gryffindors can cop an attitude just as well as the Slytherins can. Since we see everything from Harry's POV, we are naturally inclined to favor the Gryffs, but that's no reason fora Hufflepuff to do so. For example, considering Harry's relationship with Zacharias Smith, I can't see him supporting a team of which Harry is captain. 6. Do you think Malfoy had to "bribe" Harper to play? Does Harper > know Malfoy is up to something? Harper's reaction to Harry's comment is meant to imply, I think, that Harry is pretty close to the mark. At a minimum, I believe Draco told Harper to keep quiet about the whole issue. If Harper is not an idiot, he probably suspects Draco of something. 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? If McGonagall was there, > why wasn't she giving Smith what for? It was unnecessary and completely un-funny. While F&G might have made such an act seem like just an ordinary day's work, it doesn't work with Ginny. Her rejoinder was really lame in comparison to what F&G might have done. As a replacement for the Twins' twin role as agent of destruction and comic relief, Ginny doesn't cut it. 9. We don't hear anything about the Snape-McGonagall Quidditch > rivalry anymore. JKR has said she's glad to have written the last > Quidditch game. Did JKR tire of the rivalry too? Do the two > professors have more important things on their minds? Do you miss the > rivalry? My view is that the Quidditch is in the books as a metaphor for the struggle against Voldemort, and that the Quidditch episodes in each book foreshadow the book's denouemot in some way. The Snape-McGonagall rivalry was friendly, reminding us that they are on the same side ( i.e., Harry's side). Given what happens at the end of HBP, portraying a friendly rivalry would be misleading. Personally, I'm as relieved as JKR is that there's no more Quidditch to write, because the descriptions of the games themselves do become quite boring and repetitive. That's why we have so many sports cliches; there are only so many ways to describe a Quidditch goal. 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened > two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who > admires him? The revelation about Krum is not the issue; it is only a reminder of Ron's problem, which is a perception of inadequacy. Hermione's actions have already undermined his confidence in himself, and the revelation that everyone else but himself seems to have gotten some, er, face time, is just one more reminder that he is not considered up to par. The straw that broke the camel's back, though, was Hermione's assumption that Ron must have used the potion because he was successful. I think at this point, Ron *needs* Lavender, or rather he needs someone who finds him attractive as he is, to shore up his crumbling self-esteem. I do not think he consciously decides to snog Lavender in order to gain experience (it is Ginny who suggests this as his motive), or to avenge Hermione's lack of confidence. However, he soon discovers that Lavender (who I sense would bear the label "airhead" rather well) is not long-term relationship material. 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. > That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing > we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. > What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about > love? I think these images tell us less about love than about teenage romance. It's all about the loss of the innocence of one's dreams, and how teens hurt one another because they bring such raw emotions to the table without the maturity to convey their feelings -- good or bad -- in a rational manner. And no on in the series exemplifies these realities of teen life more vividly than Ron and Hermione. In spite of -- or perhaps because -- of their friendship, they can't communicate constructively about their feelings at all. This is the second appearance of the birds in the chapter -- Hermione is the only person in Transfiguration class able to conjure them. Hermione may be intellectually mature, but innocent in love (whether or not she has kissed Krum, which is never confirmed in the text). 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at > breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if > Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis > in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? I was completely taken in. But see below. 13. "Felix Felicis" is the title of the chapter. What part did the > potion really play? Does this tell us anything about the potion or > was it just part of the set up? By the end of the chapter I was beginning to wonder if Felix Felicis is nothing more than a placebo. We make our own luck, and there are studies indicating that performance is very substantially influenced by how we are *expected* to perform. Ron illustrates this phenomenon beautifully. But I think Harry's ability to extract Slughorn's Horcrux memory could fit this theory just as well. There, Harry *did* take some of the potion, but it was his confidence that allowed him to devise a successful action plan. The Wizard of Oz didn't hand out anything useful to Dorothy's companions either. Ok, I've looked at the relevant chapters, and I think a good case can be made for Placebo!Felix. But I'll have to put it in a separate post. Tomorrow, I hope. Along with an analysis of the Quidditch. And . . . and . . . . 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." Was > Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can you > think of other chapters that may have been written like this? The chapter that comes to mind is the one in GoF entitled "Mad-Eye Moody," who of course was locked in his own trunk. It was all about my favorite villain, Barty Crouch, Jr. Potioncat, who would like to thank Penapart_Elf and Carol for > suggestions and encouragement. Debbie, who would like to thank Potioncat for her intriguing questions [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From orgone9 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 03:15:59 2006 From: orgone9 at yahoo.com (Len Jaffe) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060504031559.8545.qmail@web80608.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151867 julcrybor wrote: I have been wondering if it is possible for Harry to be a horocrux. Carol responds: It sounds to me as if a deliberate act is required to encase the soul in the object *after* the murder has been committed; certainly no such spell was performed at Godric's Hollow. Now Len: Let's for a moment converge "Harry Horcrux?" and "Who else was at GH?" and approach it this way: Who was at GH, that fateful night, with dark (strong?) enough powers and magical know-how to cast the horcrux spell? Snape? Malfoy? Dumbledore? I can't think of a reasonable motive for either of them to perform the spell. If we assume that the purpose of the spell is twofold, fisrt to extract the soul shard from the murderer's body, and then to seal the shard in the vessel, then we can also imagine the scene at GH, with the main of LV's soul either flitting around the place, or having fled to parts unknown (Albania? Hoboken?), and a very small shard doing whatever it is that disembodies soul shards do. Does it get attracted to Harry's cut and enter on its own? Does somebody else enter and cast a binding enchantment to bind it into Harry? I still can't think of a compelling reason for either scenario. I don't think Harry is a horcrux, but I also don't have a plausible explanations as to what links Harry's scar and LV. Plausible explanations and wild theories welcome. Len. From AllieS426 at aol.com Thu May 4 03:23:43 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 03:23:43 -0000 Subject: Molly's clock In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151868 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Now I, for one, thought it was silly for Molly to carry the clock > around when the hands were *already* pointing to mortal peril. What's > the point? The situation, according to the clock, is already as dire > as it's going to get. The hands can't move to mortal peril because > they're already there, and the Weasleys are as safe as they *can* be > in their own home. I also don't like the fact that when a family > member really *is* in mortal peril, for example Bill when he's savaged > by Fenrir Greyback, that increased danger is not reflected by the > clock, which shows him in the same situation as Molly and Arthur when > they're sitting down to dinner. >SNIP > I suspect that the Burrow isn't the safe haven it seems to be, but > still, when we see the Weasleys at Christmas time in HBP, they're not > in danger *yet,* or at least no more danger than the average witch or > wizard. > Allie: A lot of people seem to be of the opinion that the Burrow is going to be attacked early on in the next book. Maybe this attack on the Weasley family was already in the works during HBP, and that's why the clock hands are on mortal peril? Allie (who agrees that the clock was quite useless after that point) From enlil65 at gmail.com Thu May 4 04:19:34 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 23:19:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: <20060504031559.8545.qmail@web80608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060504031559.8545.qmail@web80608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1789c2360605032119x17bb011ct61d7a5ad986251e4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151869 On 5/3/06, Len Jaffe wrote: > Now Len: > Let's for a moment converge "Harry Horcrux?" and "Who > else was at GH?" and approach it this way: Who was at > GH, that fateful night, with dark (strong?) enough > powers and magical know-how to cast the horcrux spell? > > Snape? > Malfoy? > Dumbledore? > > I can't think of a reasonable motive for either of > them to perform the spell. > Does it get attracted to Harry's cut and enter on its > own? Does somebody else enter and cast a binding > enchantment to bind it into Harry? I can't see either Dumbledore or Snape making Harry into a Horcrux; but I can see either of them making one out of something else, if they came across that severed soul bit. You ask for motivation, and indeed, why not destroy a found soul bit instead of keeping it? Because keeping it potentially gives them power over Voldemort. It gives them control; it can be used against him. Consider, for instance, the possibility of destroying it at just the right, well-planned moment, a moment that could result in Voldemort's death. Take him by surprise (Occlumency will be required) and he won't have time to do anything about it. My money is riding on there being one such Horcrux that is unknown to Voldemort; and Snape knows about it. Snape may even *be* it, and he is in the perfect position to deploy it at just the right time. > I don't think Harry is a horcrux, but I also don't > have a plausible explanations as to what links Harry's > scar and LV. The failed killing curse links them: it binds them together, it has left its mark on Harry. In my view, the only relevance of Horcruxes to this connection is that it was the Horcruxes Voldemort had made prior to that night at Godric's Hollow that kept the killing curse from working. Had he not had at least one Horcrux, the killing curse would have worked, Voldemort would have died, end of story. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu May 4 05:12:34 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 05:12:34 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605032119x17bb011ct61d7a5ad986251e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151870 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy Wilkins" wrote: >> > The failed killing curse links them: it binds them together, it has > left its mark on Harry. In my view, the only relevance of Horcruxes to this connection is that it was the Horcruxes Voldemort had made prior to that night at Godric's Hollow that kept the killing curse from working. Had he not had at least one Horcrux, the killing curse would have worked, Voldemort would have died, end of story. > Tonks: I agree that something happened between Harry and LV that never happened before and because of Lily's death. Like Peggy said it was the failed curse that linked them. I think that LV had all of his Horocruxes in place when he AK'ed Harry. He came there to kill Harry not to use him as or for a Horocrux. This I think if for no other reason than our sneeky author. It would be too easy of us to guess that now that we know about them, so that is not what she is going to do. I am thinking out loud here, hoping for some help to formulate an idea about what happened with the 3 of them. Let us look at LV, Lily and Harry from a different angle. Take the personalities out of it and look at what each might represent as concepts. Lets say LV= death Lily= Love and Harry= ? Lily implies something pure. And this brings to mind the Unicorn. So what happens when evil touches something pure? When evil murders the innocent? When Death and Love meet? Remember these are important themes to Rowling. I am trying to grab at a philosophical idea I think. Help!! There are folks here much more knowledgeable than I am in this area. Trying to think my way to the ancient magic, but it is very hard to do. But it is exciting to try to crack the mystery. Like a detective. But I am a bit stumped on this one. There are pieces missing what are they? Death is Immortal. Death can not be killed. Death can only kill. But Love is stronger. Why? Again what happens when death means something pure. When death meets the greatest form of Love? Looking for a little brainstorming session here. Any takers?? Tonks_op From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Thu May 4 06:50:26 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 23:50:26 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1753387298.20060503235026@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151871 Wednesday, May 3, 2006, 5:46:14 AM, potioncat wrote: p> 4. The Slytherin team members are Urquhart, Harper and Vaisey. Any p> thoughts on those names and what they might mean, or what images they p> conjure? How do they compare to the names of the Gryffindor beaters p> Peakes and Coote? Well, the name "Urquhart" made me think of Francis Urquhart, the evil British PM portrayed by Ian Richardson in the "House of Cards" series. I couldn't say if that's significant, though. p> 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. p> That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing p> we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. p> What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about p> love? It shows how much love can hurt. As it happens, there is currently someone whom *I'd* like to set a swarm of vicious birds on... p> 13. "Felix Felicis" is the title of the chapter. What part did the p> potion really play? Does this tell us anything about the potion or p> was it just part of the set up? In this chapter, the potion clearly plays the role of Dumbo's "Magic Feather" -- It's only true "magic" in providing self-confidence. I'm not sure if the potion itself is only a placebo... Could that alone explain their good fortune in the battle with the DE's? p> 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." Was p> Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can you p> think of other chapters that may have been written like this? Well let's see... "The Midnight Duel" (PS/SS) -- There wasn't any duel, just a run-in with Hermione and a very large member of species _Canis tricephalus_; "The Worst Birthday" (CoS) -- I think Harry *must* have had worse b-days than that *before* he discovered the WW; "Back to the Burrow" (GoF) -- The return to the Burrow doesn't actually happen until the *next* chapter; "Mad-Eye Moody" (GoF) -- Of course, it wasn't really Mad-Eye at all. A case could be made for others, but those are the ones that stand out to me... -- Dave From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Thu May 4 07:57:00 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 07:57:00 -0000 Subject: (To Catherine in particular). In-Reply-To: <20060503191522.81150.qmail@web37213.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151872 > Catherine > (whose husband STILL thinks that Harry said "abra cadabra" at some point and thinks all of us are wrong. Sigh....) > I do remember that Harry says "Hocus Pocus Jigerry Piggery" or something like that in PoA(I think) to scare Dudley off. And later had to pay for it by doing a LOT of work for Aunt Petunia before the Aunt Marge arrived. But there was no abra cadabra there. :) Brady. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Thu May 4 08:36:34 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 08:36:34 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <20060504000856.4435.qmail@web61322.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151873 Joe: But cheating wasn't incorporated in the rules. It can still be done. > > Let me see if I can clear this up. You think that the judges giving points is cheating even if it is in the rules(right?). By definition though if it is in the rules it isn't cheating. Since we have no idea what may or may not have been in the rules we can't just say that those points we cheating. > > > Most major sports have traditions of trying to get around the rules. In many cases these are some of the most "colorful" stories in them. Still if you are caught you will be punished. a_svirn: And that's exactly what I meant when I said that cheating was incorporated into the rules. Because you are *not* punished if you are caught cheating in the tournament. You don't even get reprimanded. You get a pat on your shoulder and an assurance that no harm done ? cheating is "traditional". And indeed so it is ? everyone cheats. Joe: We pretty much know that all of the contestants got help so there is no "fair" player to compare to the "foul" players. a_svirn: Exactly. "Fair is foul and foul is fair" should have been a motto of the TWT. But this means that there were no rules. When rules are in evidence you are not likely to confuse the two. > Joe: > I still think the extra points were within the rules because no one really protested. a_svirn: And how would you formulate this rule? "Judges are allowed to be guided by their partiality in awarding points?" "Judges are allowed to give extra points to those whom they deem "unfairly handicapped"?" And what kind of rules is this if it's known only to the jury? Besides, what would it has availed them, had they protested? Champions were magically compelled to go on, no matter what. Maxime and Karkaroff did try to protest about extra champion, only to get a sever scold from Dumbledore for their pains. There was only one thing against any unfair judgment ? to be unfair in return. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu May 4 10:16:35 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 10:16:35 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151874 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: a great summeary of chapter 14, which I will snip mercilessly . Potioncat: > 7. Zacharias Smith is pretty petty in this scene. Do you think he is > related to Hepzibah Smith? How are they alike? Hickengruendler: Both seem to have a certain aloofness, otherwise it's hard to say, since we saw Hepzibah only in one chapter. I'm not sure, they might be somehow related, but I can't see what it would offer for the storyline. I mean, Tom stole the locket and the cup from Hepzibah, it's not, that the Smith family is still in their possession. Therefore even if Zacharias is a descendant from Hepzibah, I'm not sure it will be important. Potioncat: > 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? Hickengruendler: I guess it's meant as comic relief, but I found it completely unfunny. I never liked the physical pranks of the twins either, but prefered some of their witty remarks ("Next door neighbours"). And wit Ginny lacks IMO completely. She just randomly insults or attacks people, and when she does something nice, it happens off-page and we were told about this through a third person (read Luna). I found all the protagonists pretty unsympathetic in the middle chapters of this book, but Ginny really was the icing on the cake. I liked her in the end, though, during and after the battle. Potioncat: > 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at > breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if > Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis > in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? Hickengruendler: Yes, I was totally taken in and loved the twist in the end. Great idea by Harry. Potioncat: > 14. Felix Felicis wasn't really in the chapter "Felix Felicis." Was > Snape's worst memory really in the chapter with that name? Can you > think of other chapters that may have been written like this? Hickengruendler: There is the chapter "The Midnight Duel" in PS, where said duel didn't happen. The whole scenario was just a trap set up by Draco. Hickengruendler From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 4 13:02:29 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 09:02:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060504130229.59995.qmail@web37209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151875 Tonks wrote: Lets say LV= death Lily= Love and Harry= ? Catherine: Redemption? That would go with the pattern, but I don't think it advances us any further. Catherine __________________________________________________ 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 quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu May 4 13:03:21 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 13:03:21 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151876 Snip Potioncat's great summary. > 1.The strange mist, which we know is due to Dementors breeding, is so > thick the Trio has trouble finding the Greenhouse. It's mentioned > very casually. Do you think it's important? Could it contribute to > any of the emotions we see in the next few chapters? > Ginger: Good catch! I reread HBP Sunday night and didn't catch that one. To be honest, I don't see anyone being "depressed" except for Ron. But he got over it once he got all over Lav-Lav. > 3.Harry makes some difficult decisions as a Quidditch captain. In > what ways has he grown? Ginger: Well, he's taller. Oh, you mean... He comes across to me as more level-headed even when he is frustrated. If you go back to the tryouts, he orders all the non-Gryffs off the field in a commanding way, but not in a tantrum-throwing way. Before when he is convinced that he is right, he gets stormy and explodes. I'm thinking here of when Hermione questioned him going after the Stone, or when he and Ron argued in GoF, or pretty much all of OoP. Here he simply has the authority and asserts it. > 4. The Slytherin team members are Urquhart, Harper and Vaisey. Any > thoughts on those names and what they might mean, or what images they > conjure? How do they compare to the names of the Gryffindor beaters > Peakes and Coote? > Ginger: Urquart strikes me as familiar. I'm not familiar with the previously suggested "House of Cards". For some reason, Marquart came to mind, but I have no idea from whence this came either. Harper made me think of Harpee (sp?) and Vaisey made me think of Vane (or vain). Is Coote pronounced Coot or Cootie? I read it as Cootie, which made me think of him as contagious, but in a juvenile way. Peakes made me think he was a bit pale. > 6. Do you think Malfoy had to "bribe" Harper to play? Ginger: Had to? No, but I think he paid him off. Had he just said he wasn't well and asked Harper to sub, Harper would probably have done so. I mean, who would give up a chance to play against the Gryffs? It also wouldn't have had the effect that it did on him. Harry shocked him, and it showed by his failure to catch the snitch. > 7. Zacharias Smith is pretty petty in this scene. Do you think he is > related to Hepzibah Smith? > Ginger: Two words: Mark Evans. On the other hand.... Nah. > 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? If McGonagall was there, > why wasn't she giving Smith what for? Ginger: Ok, I realize I'm in the minority here, but I loved it. I realize not everyone enjoys that type of action, but I got a kick out of it. I don't think McG said anything because it didn't get too far out of hand. Ginny may not have remembered to brake, but Zach did. > 9. We don't hear anything about the Snape-McGonagall Quidditch > rivalry anymore. JKR has said she's glad to have written the last > Quidditch game. Did JKR tire of the rivalry too? Do the two > professors have more important things on their minds? Do you miss the > rivalry? Ginger: Oh, heavens, I am so hoping she meant that the Quidditch scenes were already written for the next book, but I realize that's right up there with wishing to fly. I love Quidditch. But then I'm also one of those nuts who screams myself hoarse during NFL season. So there you have it. I did like the Snape/McG rivalry. Not only was it a good example of how people can be on opposite sides and still keep a professional relationship, but it added to the poignancy of McG's feeling of betrayal after the death of DD. > 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened > two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who > admires him? > Ginger: I don't think Ron was really mad at Hermione for snogging Krum. I just don't think he had thought of it before and now realized how obvious it was. Ron is not nosy in a bad way, but he probably had a niave expectancy that because they were all best friends that she'd have mentioned it. After all, we got an immediate reaction on Harry's first kiss. Instead of seeing it as her keeping a private moment (or 2) private, he saw it as her hiding something from him. They sat and discussed the Harry/Cho situation thoroughly. I think he saw it in the same way as when he thought Harry entered the TWT and didn't tell him. He was wrong, of course, but I think it shows how much Ron expects his friends to tell him. He was also miffed when Hermione didn't tell him about the TT in PoA, even though she had promised not to. As far as Lav-Lav goes, I think he was really attracted to her. As the Mother Superior told Maria in the Sound of Music, "there's nothing more attractive to a man than a woman who's in love with him." (Don't ask me how the Top Nun knew that.) I do think that at first he really felt attracted back, and, as many young folk do, he assumed that mutual attraction is the key to a perfect relationship. He was awfully innocent at that time. In fact, now that I think about it, that's how I got my first boyfriend. And the next one. > 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. > That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing > we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. > What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about > love? > Ginger: To quote song lyrics "Love stinks, yeah, yeah" "Love is a battlefield" and "Oooh, Ooh, Love hurts". There's a reason for those type of lyrics. I usually equate little birdies flying around one's head with what one sees in the cartoons when someone has been knocked loopy. Given how Ron had been treating her, I can see where she'd be a bit dazed and confused. > 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at > breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if > Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis > in Ron's juice? > Ginger: Call me a fish. She got me hook, line and sinker. > Potioncat, who would like to thank Penapart_Elf and Carol for > suggestions and encouragement. Ginger: Great job, and with those 2 wonderful people in your corner, how can you go wrong? From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 4 13:07:21 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 09:07:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: (To Catherine in particular). In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060504130721.25445.qmail@web37204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151877 > Catherine > (whose husband STILL thinks that Harry said "abra cadabra" at some point and thinks all of us are wrong. Sigh....) > Brady replied: I do remember that Harry says "Hocus Pocus Jigerry Piggery" or something like that in PoA(I think) to scare Dudley off. And later had to pay for it by doing a LOT of work for Aunt Petunia before the Aunt Marge arrived. But there was no abra cadabra there. :) Catherine answers: Yeah, and I even showed him the paragraph, but he insists that it was in the WW that he said it because someone freaked out because it sounded like the Avada Kadevara curse. He can be a little stubborn at times, so I know that we're all correct, he doesn't, but it it really worth an argument? Anyway, he's only read the books once.... Thanks for the reference though! Catherine 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 Culture club Adult education 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. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail - --------------------------------- Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 4 13:36:40 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 09:36:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060504133641.62049.qmail@web37203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151878 potioncat wrote: (snipped chapter discussion and excellent summary...) Felix Felicis Questions: >3.Harry makes some difficult decisions as a Quidditch captain. In >what ways has he grown? As well as being able to lead probably the most long and frustrating trials in a great many years...he is now a lot more able to keep his anger in check (as opposed to with Umbrage). He retains his leadership skills from the DA and improves, I believe in his people skills. I also think we see him able to control and analyse a situation that is quite overwhelming with the number of students turning up in the first place, and devising a good plan to weed out the really bad flyers and players quite efficiently. >5. Many Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs had taken sides. Does this give >the impression that Slytherin House is not universally disliked? It >sounds as if the individuals within the two houses had taken sides, >not that one house was pulling for one team. What does this mean? Well, hopefully it shows the seeds of the house unity that has been absent since Slytherin's departure. >8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? If McGonagall was there, >why wasn't she giving Smith what for? I also thought this was funny (although I'm in the minority). I don't find that Ginny is a bully hexing anyone who crosses her. In fact the only person we see her hexing (apart from in self-defense) is Zacharias Smith and on both occasions he was being his annoying and insulting self. Don't forget he was insulting her in front of the whole school during his commentating. I think he got off easy. He didn't have to go to the hospital wing or anything. She didn't injure him so as he couldn't play against them. >11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. >That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing >we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some >damage. >What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about >love? Well, this is the second time in the series that I can remember birds pecking at Ron, the first time was in OotP when Harry sent Hedwig messages to Ron, Hermione and Sirius with the instructions to peck them until they wrote good long replies (IIRC) Hermione's reaction was more emotional, she had asked Ron out to Slughorn's party. It wasn't meant "as friends" as Ron later says, he was wrong about that, he was justifying his being with Lavander. The reaction the both of them had during that herbology scene is evident that she was going to ask him as her *date*. The next thing, he's being cold and distant with her and then starts snogging Lavander in front of her. Her reaction is not particularily nice, but knowing what a powerful witch she is, he also got off easy. 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? You know, I'm trying to remember back to my first read, and I don't know. I think I had a feeling something was up. Firstly, Ron and Harry were alone for quite a while before Hermione showed up, why would he have waited for a witness? Had he really done it, he would have done it before. Also, I didn't think Harry would really cheat that way, had he done it, it would have changed my view of him and his character. Catherine (who thankfully re-read her post and hopefully managed to catch all the typos....I really shouldn't post after a night shift!) __________________________________________________ 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 willsonkmom at msn.com Thu May 4 13:38:32 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 13:38:32 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151879 > 4. The Slytherin team members are Urquhart, Harper and Vaisey. Any > thoughts on those names and what they might mean, or what images they > conjure? How do they compare to the names of the Gryffindor beaters > Peakes and Coote? Potioncat: Well, perhaps I was up too late when I wrote this one. But here's my thouhts. Urquhart is the first name of the Wizard who invented the Entrail Expelling Curse. To harp on someone is to nag or to complain, to bother. Although that would fit better for a beater, I think. Vaisey looks French like Malfoy or Lestrange. I thought perhaps the names of the Slytherin team were supposed to sound intimidating. (By JKR, not by the character who put the team together.) To be honest, it seems we get Peakes and Coote mentioned together and it just sort of had a ring to it...I think it's like "mind your P's and Q's..." However, coote is slang for a "simpleton" and Harper is rumored to be an idiot. It sort of matches. From mkk69 at hotmail.com Thu May 4 05:20:18 2006 From: mkk69 at hotmail.com (woollybear_99) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 05:20:18 -0000 Subject: Molly's clock In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151880 Carol wrote: > > Now I, for one, thought it was silly for Molly to carry the clock > > around when the hands were *already* pointing to mortal peril. > > What's the point? The situation, according to the clock, is already > > as dire as it's going to get. The hands can't move to mortal peril > > because they're already there, and the Weasleys are as safe as they > > *can* be in their own home. As strange as it may be perhaps the clock is a source of comfort for Molly. Or maybe I feel this way because I cary a phone around the house with me when I am worried about the well being of a love one who is away from the house. Sometimes when you feel like your world is coming unglued you hold on to things around you for comfort, even if holding on to them is totally useless and no help to your situation what so ever. Just a thought. woollybear_99 From a_svirn at yahoo.com Thu May 4 16:06:45 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 16:06:45 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151881 > Potioncat: > Well, perhaps I was up too late when I wrote this one. But here's my > thouhts. > > Urquhart is the first name of the Wizard who invented the Entrail > Expelling Curse. To harp on someone is to nag or to complain, to > bother. Although that would fit better for a beater, I think. Vaisey > looks French like Malfoy or Lestrange. I thought perhaps the names of > the Slytherin team were supposed to sound intimidating. (By JKR, not by > the character who put the team together.) > > To be honest, it seems we get Peakes and Coote mentioned together and > it just sort of had a ring to it...I think it's like "mind your P's and > Q's..." > > However, coote is slang for a "simpleton" and Harper is rumored to be > an idiot. It sort of matches. > a_svirn: Harper makes me think of Harper Lee (To Kill A Mockingbird), Urquhart and VaiZey with *z* can be found in The Peerage, but they don't seem to be particularly distinguished. The Cootes are also in the Peerage and they are rather grand by comparison ? the whole host of barons, baronets and even a few earls (of Mountrath and of Bellomont). I couldn't find `idiot' meaning for harper. I did find "app. error for *harpy*" with quotations from Marlowe and Shakespeare. From lenabogina at yahoo.com Thu May 4 12:44:25 2006 From: lenabogina at yahoo.com (lenabogina) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 12:44:25 -0000 Subject: "Remember My Last" Musing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151882 > Kim Wrote: > "None of them noticed a large, tawny owl flutter past the window." > I began to wonder if the owl was instructed to wait until Petunia was > alone to deliver his message to her. > > > Nick wrote: > > Also note that Hogwarts owls are large and tawny. This increases the > likelihood that the correspondence was from Dumbledore. lenabogina: And there were another two owls flying by Dursley's house that night before Dumbledore arrived. Sorry, I don't have the text at the moment, but it was something about 'the tabby cat (MM) did not notice two owls flying by...' From enlil65 at gmail.com Thu May 4 17:40:51 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 12:40:51 -0500 Subject: Scar connection between Harry and Voldemort and the "gleam of triumph" Message-ID: <1789c2360605041040r2a854c12uf557cebf5b724761@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151883 I would like to continue on from one of my earlier posts, because after further thinking on it, I think it goes a long way toward explaining Dumbledore's "gleam of triumph". The original message is in the "Voldemort as a Ghost?" thread, here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/151547 To begin (quoting my own message): > Voldemort fires an Avada Kedavra at young Harry, but it cannot kill > Harry because of Lily's sacrifice and rebounds on Voldemort instead; > however, it can't kill Voldemort either, because of his Horcruxes. > > This is what makes Harry and Voldemort equals as stated in the > prophecy: Voldemort can't kill Harry because of Lily's protection, and > Harry can't kill Voldemort because of his Horcruxes. This forms a > kind of symmetry that is unique between them (AK will kill anyone > else, but they can't use it to kill each other--this makes them exact > equals, no one else can equal them in this regard). The mark of this > symmetry ("mark him as his equal") is Harry's scar. > > What happened to the failed Avada Kedavra, did it simply dissipate? I > don't think so. I think that since the Avada Kedavra was unable to > complete its job, it (or rather, the energy of it) has been hanging > around, held between Harry and Voldemort and making an active > connection between them. Both Harry and Voldemort can travel along > this connection: this is what enables Harry to feel Voldemort's > emotions and be Voldemort in his dreams, and it is what enables > Voldemort to plant ideas in Harry and see out of his eyes. It gives > Harry his special knowledge and his connection to the Heir of > Slytherin that enables him to open the Chamber of Secrets. To summarize, the important point here is that the failed Avada Kedavra curse forms a connection between Harry and Voldemort; the scar is its mark; it didn't go away, it is still active; and it is energy that is held between Harry and Voldemort. Here is some evidence, from PS/SS, that the connection is active: >>>> Begin quote, SS/PS, pp.294-295, US paperback: ... Harry felt Quirrell's hand close on his wrist. At once, a needle-sharp pain seared accross Harry's scar; his head felt as though it was about to split in two; he yelled, struggling with all his might, and to his surprise, Quirrell let go of him. The pain in his head lessened--he looked around wildly to see where Quirrell had gone, and saw him hunched in pain, looking at his fingers--they were blistering before his eyes. "Seize him! SEIZE HIM!" shrieked Voldemort again, and Quirrell lunged, knocking Harry clean off his feet, landing on top of him, both hands around Harry's neck--Harry's scar was almost blinding him with pain, yet he could see Quirrell howling in agony. "Master, I cannot hold him--my hands--my hands" And Quirrell, though pinning Harry to the ground with his knees, let go of his neck and stared, bewildered, at his own palms--Harry could see they looked burned, raw, red, and shiny. "Then kill him, fool, and be done!" screeched Voldemort. Quirrell raised his hand to perform a deadly curse, but Harry, by instinct, reached up and grabbed Quirrell's face-- "AAAARGH!" Quirrell rolled off him, his face blistering, too, and then Harry knew: Quirrell couldn't touch his bare skin, not without suffering terrible pain--his only chance was to keep hold of Quirrell, keep him in enough pain to stop him from doing a curse. Harry jumped to his feet, caught Quirrell by the arm, and hung on as tight as he could. Quirrell screamed and tried to throw Harry off--the pain in Harry's head was building--he couldn't see--he could only hear Quirrell's terrible shrieks and Voldemort's yells of, "KILL HIM! KILL HIM!" and other voices, maybe in Harry's own head, crying, "Harry! Harry!". He felt Quirrell's arm wrenched from his grasp, knew all was lost, and fell into blackness, down... down... down... >>>> End quote I interpret this pain Harry feels in his scar when he touches Quirrell, and the way it destroys Voldemort-bound-Quirrell's body, as direct evidence that the energy that is held between Voldemort and Harry is still active and flowing between them. It flows from Harry's touch to Voldemort, for as long as Harry can hold on to him. It is interesting that the original, backfiring Avada Kedavra destroyed Voldemort's original body. It appears that the same situation still obtains: when Harry touches Quirrell/Voldemort in PS/SS, his body is destroyed. It would seem that if Voldemort can make a new body (as he had partially done in his merger with Quirrell), Harry can destroy it simply by touching him: the physical contact makes the curse energy flow. This situation changes in Goblet of Fire, when Voldemort uses Harry's blood to make his new body. Here is the quote: >>>> Begin quote, GOF, p.696, US paperback: "... [Voldemort] said the protection my--my mother left in me--he'd have it too. And he was right--he could touch me without hurting himself, he touched my face." For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore's eyes. But the next second, he was sure he had imagined it, for when Dumbledore had returned to his seat behind the desk, he looked as old and weary as Harry had ever seen him. "Very well," he said, sitting down again. "Voldemort has overcome that particular barrier. Harry, continue, please." >>> End quote This seems to be a clear indication that Dumbledore saw significance in this new state of affairs. So what is he seeing? I think a couple of things: 1. He sees that Voldemort understands what happened to him at Godric's Hollow, and that Voldemort's understanding matches his [Dumbledore's] understanding. This is confirmation that the understanding is correct. 2. It directly confirms the nature of the connection between Harry and Voldemort: the failed killing curse is hanging around and holds energy. The energy can no longer destroy Voldemort's body through Harry's touch because it "recognizes" Voldemort's new body as if it were Harry's. I think point 2 is very important. Voldemort altered his being by making all his Horcruxes, he altered it enough that not only did the killing curse not kill him, but it destroyed his body. This new body which has part of Harry's being in it has changed the balance. I would now predict that since the curse can no longer destroy Voldemort's body, it is closer to being able to kill him like a normal AK: it won't destroy his body. (Normally the AK does not harm the body.) All that is stopping it now is Voldemort's Horcruxes. Voldemort thinks that having Harry's blood protection is enough, but it isn't. If he loses his Horcruxes, he loses all: he will die. He doesn't know that Harry is Horcrux hunting. Continuing with my old post: > The connection is active and holds energy. Its emblem is Harry's > lightning bolt scar. This is very interesting because a lightning > bolt is a sign of power (as in, High Voltage in the context of > electricity). So my proposition is this: when Voldemort's final > Horcrux is destroyed, Harry and Voldemort will cease being equals > because Voldemort will again be mortal. This will break the symmetry > between them, and the energy that has been held between them all these > years from the failed Avada Kedavra will then be able to complete its > job: it will rebound on Voldemort, from Harry. If Harry is physically > near Voldemort when this happens (either must die at the hand of the > other), it will probably kill Voldemort. And this time it will leave his body behind. I can only guess that this process will be extremely difficult and painful for Harry, judging from the pain he experienced when the energy flowed in PS/SS. It could possibly kill him (again, either must die at the hand of the other). How will he overcome this risk? -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 18:45:24 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 18:45:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's resourcefulness in the Second Task (Was: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter) In-Reply-To: <002401c66e20$cc1c66a0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151884 Carol earlier: > > In any case, regardless of what Harry did once he was under the water, all he did to enable himself to compete in the task in the first place and prevent himself from drowning was to chew on and swallow a rubbery plant suggested by a DE in disguise and provided by a house-elf. No resourcefulness on Harry's part is involved. Surely any credit for resourcefulness here belongs partly to Dobby but mostly to Crouch!Moody, who despite being a fanatic and a madman is apparently also a brilliant and gifted wizard like his father. > > Carol, who hopes she doesn't sound like a fan of Crouch!Moody as she's nothing of the sort > > kchuplis wrote: > > At the risk of repeating myself (bear with me elves. Maybe Yahoomort lost this: Here is my lonely take on it: if you showed every student what happened to Harry at the Graveyard and said, "you can have all kinds of help and a nice broom and be given extra points in games, but you have to go through that or you can skip having to experience that and not get quite so much help" how many students would choose to be tortured, cruciated, terrorized, humiliated and have people killed in front of them, (only because they are who they are) and the person "came with" in order to get help and extras? I'm thinking mmmm....no one would trade for that? > > It's just a thought to put this in perspective. Carol responds: Forgive me for not responding sooner (the three-post limit, you know), but I don't see the relevance of your point to mine. As I stated in the disclaimer that you snipped, I'm not taking a stand on the sportsmanship question (note that I altered the subject line this time around to emphasize the shift in focus, as I should have done before). Nor am I talking about extra points or nice brooms or whether Harry deserves the extra help extended to him throughout the TWT and elsewhere in the books. (I'm quite happy that Fawkes appeared in CoS and Dumbledore arrived to fight LV in OoP, to give just two examples. As for the TWT, considering that Crouch!Moody entered his name against the rules in the first place, it's only fair that he would help him survive it, if only for his own evil ends.) But I wasn't talking about fairness or sportsmanship, much less Harry's suffering in the graveyard scene, which no one who's read the books would think of denying. I was merely responding to Geoff's point about Harry's resourcefulness and noting that it failed him *in this specific instance* (figuring out how to survive the Second Task). Please note that I'm not questioning Harry's resourcefulness in general or his courage or his moral fiber or any other qualities or virtues required in a hero. I am not talking about whether he deserved extra points for moral fiber (though any points awarded for resourcefulness would have been undeserved.) Noting one instance of failure on Harry's part does not indicate dislike or disrespect for him, nor does it in any way detract from his suffering in the graveyard or elsewhere. In fact, failure makes him human. If he didn't fail on occasion, it would be difficult for those of us who do sometimes fail to empathize with him. Nor am I in any way implying that any other student would like to trade places with him (whether or not that's the case, and I rather think that Draco for one is jealous of Harry, it has nothing to do with my post). So, in essence, I don't see how your post (which I read and agreed with the first time) puts mine "in perspective." We appear to be talking about completely different things. Perhaps you had me mixed up with someone else in the thread? Carol, noting that any interested person can go upthread to read the snipped portions of her post and perhaps find the connection that she's overlooking From dougsamu at golden.net Thu May 4 16:36:46 2006 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 12:36:46 -0400 Subject: Harry a Horcrux ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151885 Ooooooh! I know! I know! I've been waiting for a time when my head is clear to restate all this, but now seems like a reasonable time to jump in. Follow me .... Magic is basically Imagination made real. Things can be enchanted with a semblance if intelligence, will, personality, memory... The Patronus - the only example of magical theory that we truly have in canon that can be trusted - is Happiness recalled and projected as a physical manifestation to protect against Dementors, It is emotion made real. It is difficult to validly build an idea on only one example. But I believe Lupin can be trusted. Trusting Fake!Moody, is another issue altogether. It is Happiness which counters (Dementor-caused) Depression. Where does the Happiness go when the spell is over? Speculation 1: Either it doesn't go anywhere because it is the wizards own (it returns, but basically it never really left), or it is a projected copy and just dissipates. Like an image on film is projected onto a screen, it is neither separate nor different from the image on the film. It depends entirely on the film and projector to exist. It is essentially a copy of the image on film, but not separate from it. Now the image can conceivably burn into the screen if it is still long enough, or powerful enough in it's energy. An atomic blast left shadows of the persons. Even strobes can leave images behind on sensitive material, cameras can capture external light on film in the form of images. Speculation 2: In order to enchant an object, the wizard decides what qualities the object should have, casts, or projects the qualities onto the object and 'slices' them off from the wizard himself. Speculation 3: body is very receptive to soul. One could say it is it's natural home. Speculation 4: something 'physical' - in a magical sense - is manifest. What would need to be made real enough to knock out the life of another? Wild jump: I suspect that Soul itself is projected in Avada Kadavra to knock out the soul of the victim. In another thread in another place, an example was offered of Australian Aboriginal shamans pointing a stick and projecting spirit to drive out the disease (malevolent spirit) in another. It is cast against the victims own soul - projected against the victim, and returns to the caster. Consider the example of The Patronus. a) Either the projection burned into baby!Harry, unable to return, b) dissapates, d) or got stuck. Speculation 5: What could possibly counter Death? What could possibly counter a soul projected to kill? Love? Sacrifice? So Voldemort's projection hit Baby!Harry, ( the scar is a mark of Dark Magic) was rejected by Lily's protection, and returned the force and intent of the spell to Voldemort. Remember too, that line of sight, time and distance are important in Magic. Casting a spell essentially makes a charged path, like lightning, and the return stroke follows the charged path. It doesn't bounce around like billiard balls. And a charged soul, if it is indeed projected as Avada Kadavra, would return to the caster anyway. e) returned unable to find the destroyed body? Speculation 6: Would the Avada Kadavra cast that night in Godric's Hollow be sufficiently strong enough to burn in a image of Voldemort soul on baby!Harry? It would be trivial to kill a spider or a fox. There would be no risk. Killing a person requires, no doubt a full portion of projected soul. Speculation 7: In order to function, horcruxes must have a connection to the main soul. Yes Voldemort cannot feel the connection to his soul bits, for various reasons, but horcruxes must act like tethers holding down a hot air balloon, or anchors from a ship or boat. Each individual horcrux must have some kind of ethereal, non- line-of sight connection to the main soul. Voldy does have a full soul, it's just in pieces in various places. Alternately, as Dumbledore explains, even as Voldy's soul is diminished, his powers have not. Speculation 8: Voldy received the full brunt of his own Avada Kadavra. That's what killed him. "Let the thing be destroyed", What exactly is the thing to be destroyed? Could be Soul. Would the spell have been distorted enough to destroy Body? Speculation 8: Harry is the only (possible soul vessel) horcrux to have sensory input. Every other hhorcrux is an inanimate object, essentially dead. A soul fragment, or burned in image identical to the original - in Harry's exceptional case - is still 'alive'. It has senses, and an ethereal connection to the main soul bit that doesn't not require line of sight. This does not require Avada Kadavra to be the soul splitting spell, or even required as a step in a horcrux creation. It could be, if the Split-off and encase were added to it. It may be the spell required to destroy them though. Doug Rogers There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in. ____________________ From julcrybor at yahoo.com Thu May 4 19:32:38 2006 From: julcrybor at yahoo.com (crystal borden) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 12:32:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry a Horcrux ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060504193238.87031.qmail@web38211.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151887 Doug Rogers wrote: snip >> Speculation 8: Harry is the only (possible soul vessel) horcrux to have sensory input. Every other horcrux is an inanimate object, essentially dead. A soul fragment, or burned in image identical to the original - in Harry's exceptional case - is still 'alive'. It has senses, and an ethereal connection to the main soul bit that doesn't not require line of sight. << julcrybor: Harry is not the only living horcrux. Nagini, LV's snake, is one too; that is why Harry was able to see the attack of Mr. Weasley. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu May 4 19:26:56 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 19:26:56 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151888 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: a_svirn: > And that's exactly what I meant when I said that cheating was > incorporated into the rules. Because you are *not* punished if you > are caught cheating in the tournament. You don't even get > reprimanded. You get a pat on your shoulder and an assurance that no > harm done ? cheating is "traditional". And indeed so it is ? > everyone cheats. Geoff: This thread is degenerating into one of those "table tennis" exchanges where those of us looking in merely switch our bemused attention from one contributor to the other - and it is plain daft. Let's consider the basic facts an d try to rationalise the matter... (1) In sporting terms, cheating is using improper methods and possibly "illegal" assistance to gain an advantage or subvert a game and bypass the rules. (2) By that definition, there need to be rules otherwise cheating cannot take place because there is no structure to subvert. (3) By the same definition, since cheating is attempting to bypass the rules, it cannot be part of the rules because it would be unable to undermine itself. If cheating is covertly accepted as part of the culture of the game, that does not incorporate it into the rules; it is operating outside the rules and is having a blind eye turned to it which may give it a de facto legitimacy but not a de jure standing. QED From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu May 4 20:25:40 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 20:25:40 -0000 Subject: Scar connection between Harry and Voldemort and the "gleam of triumph" In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605041040r2a854c12uf557cebf5b724761@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151889 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy Wilkins" wrote: >(snipped major part of a very good post) > > Voldemort thinks that having Harry's blood protection is enough, but it isn't. If he loses his Horcruxes, he loses all: he will die. He doesn't know that Harry is Horcrux hunting. > > (snip) > > The connection is active and holds energy. Its emblem is Harry's > > lightning bolt scar. Tonks: I like the idea of the energy still being there between them. It explains the connection between them without Harry being a Horcrux. (I don't think that is why no one could touch Harry, that is because of Lily's protection in Harry's skin.) But here is a question regarding LV's new body: LV once had a body with the blood of Slytherin now he has the blood of Lily. He has his Muggle father's bone and the hand of Peter, but his blood is no longer that of Slytherin. Right? How does this make a difference? The Horcruxes only hold his soul parts so those would not be affected by his new body, or would they? I would guess that the soul is seperate from the body, but that in not XC thought so if she has soul and body as one then don't they have to match somehow...?? I mean the soul parts were part of a body with Slytherin blood but now that body is gone and the only body his last soul part is in has changed it chemical composition... So it that soul part still connected to the others? Dear me, I get dizzy trying to figure this out. Also what are the other reasons if any that his no longer having Slytherin blood would make a difference?? And what will happen if Harry just puts down his wand and walks out in front of LV and just lets LV AK him again?? I have a theory about that, but first want to hear what others think. Tonks_op From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Thu May 4 20:52:29 2006 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 20:52:29 -0000 Subject: Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: <20060504031559.8545.qmail@web80608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151890 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Len Jaffe wrote: > > julcrybor wrote: > I have been wondering if it is possible for Harry > to be a horocrux. > > Carol responds: > It sounds to me as if a deliberate act is required to > encase the soul in the object *after* > the murder has been committed; certainly no such > spell was performed at Godric's Hollow. > > Now Len: > Let's for a moment converge "Harry Horcrux?" and "Who > else was at GH?" and approach it this way: Who was at > GH, that fateful night, with dark (strong?) enough > powers and magical know-how to cast the horcrux spell? Doddie chimes in: What if Wormtail created "Horcrux Harry"?? It appeared that Wormtail had Voldemort's wand, from which we could deduce that Peter Petigrew was at Godrics Hollow that fateful night. Judging from PP's killing of 12 muggles, being an animagus and framing Sirius for his betrayal we know that he has the skill. Motive: Revenge on Voldemort for making him betray his friends, or perhaps his own guilt over what he had done. I also believe that Harry may no longer be a horcux due to Voldemort using Harry's blood to regain a body and I think any Voldysoul remnants may have left Harry(returned home) after Voldemort possessed him in the MOM. Doddie (who wonders what Snape and Wormtail were really up to at Spinners End) From orgone9 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 20:48:35 2006 From: orgone9 at yahoo.com (Len Jaffe) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 13:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scar connection between Harry and Voldemort and the "gleam of triumph" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060504204836.76511.qmail@web80608.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151891 Tonks: But here is a question regarding LV's new body: LV once had a body with the blood of Slytherin now he has the blood of Lily. He has his Muggle father's bone and the hand of Peter, but his blood is no longer that of Slytherin. Right? How does this make a difference? Len now: I just thought of another variable. DD mentioned PP being in debt to HP for his life (prevented his death in POA, planning to geta confession to free SB). Now LV is made from some of that flesh. I wonder if that will play into our denoument. Would that be more or less cheesey than PP physically preventing HP's death or serious inury? PP acting to protect Harry could be believable. The life-debt-made-tangible angle played out as some odd protection for Harry might seem too much like a Deus Ex Machina, like suddenly being able to apparate your way out of a corner you painted yourself into. Food for thought... Len. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 22:15:05 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 22:15:05 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151892 > >>Potioncat: > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, > Chapter 14, Felix Felicis > > Ron and Harry walk in on Ginny and Dean snogging behind a > tapestry. Ron and Ginny argue about her relationship and Ron's > lack of experience. Harry is conflicted between his attraction to > Ginny and his loyalty to Ron. He thinks it would be inappropriate > to date Ginny. > Betsy Hp: Okay, I'm going to do it; I'm going to touch the third rail. Let's discuss the Ginny/Harry ship that sets sail in this chapter. ::evil chortling combined with diabolical hand rubbing:: There are three main things that happen in this scene, IMO: 1. Harry's "chest monster" is born (a thousand comic fanarts are launched). 2. Ginny and Ron throw down (and boy does it get ugly). 3. Ginny gets very, very, very angry (continues the rage into the quidditch game?). So, to the first. The chest monster analogy: "It was as though something large and scaly erupted into life in Harry's stomach, clawing at his insides: Hot blood seemed to flood his brain, so that all thought was extinguished, replaced by a savage urge to jinx Dean into jelly. Wrestling with this sudden madness, he heard Ron's voice as though from a great distance away." (HBP scholastic p.286) When it's first used I think it's a good way to describe jealousy without linking the "green-eyed monster" with our green-eyed hero (which would have been confusing). Plus it's not just a monster, there's boiling blood and madness It's vivid and discriptive, and for me, it worked. What pushed it into comedy, IMO, was the repetitiveness of the monster. It roars approval, twice on the same page. My goodness, it even purrs a page or two later. That's too much action on the part of the chest monster. I think it would have been better if boiling blood and madness shared some of the play time. Or maybe, let Harry acknowledge that the monster is he. *Harry* wants to kick Dean off the team. *Harry* likes the idea of kissing Ginny. Using the monster so often slipped it from clever to cute, unfortunately. And it is unfortunate because I *loved* that it was jealousy that pushed Harry into a full on crush on Ginny. It fit his character *perfectly*, IMO. And it echoed his jealousy over Ron becoming Prefect, with all the temptations and wrestling with his conscience that issue raised. I just think it could have been illustrated in a less silly manner. So, let's talk about issue 2, The Fight. My goodness this was a doozy. I have sisters. I'm incredibly familiar with the virgin vs. slut fight. (Um, to not shock anyone unfamiliar with such battles: it can be over how many boys you've held hands with if you're young enough.) I wasn't aware boys took part in such battles, and I never knew it took place between brothers and sisters. But there we are. I will say that this fight struck me as very nasty. (Virgin vs. slut fights usually are. Hair-pulling generally follows.) And I'm not entirely sure what started it. I mean, yes, Ron and Harry walk in on Ginny making out with Dean in a hallway and Ron protests. But I don't get the level of Ginny's anger. She was making out with a guy in a hallway. A corridor that is described as a "usual shortcut up to Gryffindor Tower". So it's not like she isn't aware that she's exposing herself to comment. Also, it's not like Ron has been policing Ginny. He didn't realize she was dating Michael Corner. And he didn't realize that she'd started dating Dean until she told him. If Ron had been dogging Dean and Ginny's every move, I could understand the level of rage Ginny flies into at this moment. But from what I've read, this is the first Ron says anything. And he's not really out of bounds. I can't see any big brother being happy with his sister making out in a public corridor. (Big sisters generally don't approve of such things either. ) And yet, Ginny turns it into a massive deal, pulls her wand, and then digs up everything she can think of to humiliate Ron with. (Screaming about his crush on their Aunt is bringing in the big guns, IMO. There's no way Ron wanted that bit of information spread around.) By the end of the fight Ginny is practically crying she's so angry. The fight, taken in and of itself, does not make sense, IMO. Even putting it into context does little to explain it. And it doesn't do Ginny any favors. No one looks good in the middle of a temper tantrum. (Though it is funny to picture Harry seeing Ginny in soft- focus, slow-mo while her face twists with vindictive rage. I'm just not sure this is what JKR was going for.) And that leads me to the final issue: Ginny's Rage. Ginny is angry throughout this chapter. And I can't find anything that might have set it off. She's angry at the quidditch practice (snapping at Ron for no reason). She's unreasonably furious in the corridor. And her attack on Zacharius made no sense at all. Zacharius had only made derisive comments about Ginny at the beginning of the match. By the end Ginny had played well enough, Zacharius couldn't say anything. *And* Ginny's team won (thanks in part to some spectacular playing on Ginny's part). Why does she feel the need to physically attack Zacharius at the end of the game? If JKR hadn't given that interview to the Mugglenet folks, I'd consider this suspicious behavior pointing to some underlying problem. Ginny's frightened by Voldemort's increasing power; Ginny is being bothered by strange dreams she's afraid are connected to Tom Riddle possessing her in CoS; Ginny really, really *hates* that Bill is getting married and is taking it badly. IOWs, I'd think there was a mystery there. But, having read JKR's interview I have a sinking feeling that this is JKR writing "spunky". It doesn't work. There's a difference between spunky and angry. In this chapter, Ginny is angry. She only calms down when Ron gets a girlfriend. Ooh, maybe Ginny didn't like the idea of Hermione dating her brother? Yeah, I don't buy it either. Betsy Hp (whose favorite "spunky girl" is Starbuck on Battlestar Galactica) From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu May 4 22:33:55 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 22:33:55 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151893 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat wrote: Felix Felicis Questions: > > 1.The strange mist, which we know is due to Dementors breeding, is so > thick the Trio has trouble finding the Greenhouse. It's mentioned > very casually. Do you think it's important? Could it contribute to > any of the emotions we see in the next few chapters? Angie replies: Actually, I hadn't thought of that. It was also mentioned in the very first chapter. It just seemed like foreshadowing for the last book, which would apparently mean we can look forward to a lot more Dementors (BTW, how long does it take them to become "adults?") > Potioncat: 8. What do you think of Ginny's retaliation? Angie: I loved it! I think JKR has been building her character all along (think back to the MOM scene where she didn't want Luna to help her walk when she hurt her ankle). Look how Ginny has grown from the first two books (where to me, she seemed a bit timid) into a resolute, determined, gritty young woman, and in doing so, became the type of person to catch Harry's attention for something other than her looks (note that she is described by others -- but not Harry - as pretty). She stands up for herself (re Ron and Dean) and defends those she cares about, even if she does it in an unconventional manner in this particular scene. "Forgot to brake!" LOL. > Potioncat: > 10. How can Ron really be mad at Hermione for something that happened > two years ago? Is he using Lavender, or does he need/want someone who > admires him? > Angie again: Easily -- no resolution of the issue. I think one of Ron's best traits is his loyalty and whether he realizes it or not, he expects others to be as loyal as he is (which is why he got ticked at Harry in GOF -- he felt betrayed). When Hermione goes off with Vickie, Ron's crushed but can't even admit it to himself. If he would have admitted it, maybe he wouldn't have still been harboring such strong resentment in HBP. I also believe Ron thinks he's not smart enough or good enough for Hermione, so for her to take up with the world's most famous Quidditch player probably only drove that wound deeper and poured copious amounts of salt on it, which rendered it VERY slow to heal. As for Lavender, I don't think Ron's using her. She flirted with him first, but only after she knew he was involved with the MOM incident. Now that he's "all interesting", she's interested. Maybe she's using him. I don't believe he had strong feelings for her but no, I don't think he was just using her for snogging practice. Bear in mind that Hermione has, by this point in the book, made comments about Harry being "fanciable" and "interesting" or "fascinating" or something like that -- words she has NEVER used to describe Ron. I think Ron's fearing they may become a couple and leave him behind, so he looks elsewhere. Maybe Hermione will appreciate Lavendar a little more when Ron finally kisses her b/c he won't be such an amateur! (Can't believe I said that!) Of course Ron wants someone to admire him (who doesn't?) but what he needs is someone to encourage him, which is what Hermione in her overbearing and highly critical way tries to do. I think she gets so irritated with him because she knows he could think more deeply about things and could "do better." But I digress... Potioncat: > 11. We see Hermione with a flock of yellow birds around her head. > That image is often used to represent innocence or love. Next thing > we see, those birds are attacking Ron, and apparently do some damage. > What does this tell us about Hermione? Or does it tell us more about > love? Angie: Honestly, the first time I read this, I was shocked. I couldn't help but think of the Alfred Hitchcock movie. I don't know why this "came off" to me worse than any of the other spells that any of the students have cast on each other (to this point in the story), but it did. The birds pecking at someone's face, in particular seemed so much more sinister to me than using a wand. I kept thinking, "He could have lost an eye!" Does her behavior support Slughorn's statement about "the power of obsessive love?" I think it at least tells us that Hermione, perhaps unrealistically, thought that Ron was more mature than he is -- she expected better of him. Maybe she also feels angry with herself because she believed he was interested in her and then felt stupid for believing that. Perhaps she just wanted Ron to know how she felt when she saw him with Lavendar -- like birds were pecking at her flesh? Not that he was likely to grasp the symbolism. I think it's important to remember that nowhere is Hermione described as pretty and if she believes she's not, that's bound to affect her self-esteem. I picture her as plain and bookish, and as someone who had few friends before Hogwarts. I don't agree that Hermmione kissed Victor (Hermione never said that); I'm not convinced that they were more than friends. If that's so, then (I'm assuming) Ron is the first guy that Hermione has "fancied." So, she's bound to be upset and angry. And witches/wizards have the ability to express their anger in a way we Muggles cannot. (Let's just say it's a good thing some days that I lack the ability to conjure flesh-pecking birds!_ I guess it could have been worse -- she could have conjured fire on him! What's more, even if she did have a thing for Victor, she apparently got over it. So maybe she did snog Victor and is mad b\c she gave him up for Ron, who is now snogging Lavendar? Or maybe she's made b/c she didn't snog Victor and gave him up for Ron, who is now snogging Lavendar?? > 12. JKR set us up. The title of the chapter, the description at > breakfast and the description of the game all made it look as if > Harry had spiked Ron's drink. Did you think Harry put Felix Felicis > in Ron's juice? What did you expect the outcome to be? > Angie again: Nah, I actually had that one figured out. Maybe the only thing in the entire series, mind you. If I was Hermione, I would work on being a little less predictable. Like Harry, I expected Hermione to jump to the wrong conclusion, for Ron to think Harry had done it, and therefore, to make it a self-fullfulling prophesy. Also like Harry, I didn't expect the soap-opera angst that followed, but Ron just doesn't get that Hermione, in her own way, had just as much faith in Ron as Harry did, does he? From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri May 5 00:17:31 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 00:17:31 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151894 > Geoff: > This thread is degenerating into one of those "table tennis" exchanges > where those of us looking in merely switch our bemused attention from > one contributor to the other - and it is plain daft. a_svirn: And here I thought you deprecate abrasive comments. Why not turn your attention to other threads, if this one exasperates you? > Geoff: > If cheating is covertly accepted as part of the culture of the game, > that does not incorporate it into the rules; it is operating outside the > rules and is having a blind eye turned to it which may give it a de facto > legitimacy but not a de jure standing. a_svirn: Incidentally, is it possible to be "de facto legitimate"? I though legitimacy implies conformity to rule or law, in other words, being *de jure*. Anyway. Because of this "culture of the game", as you put it, the rules simply aren't working. There is a rule that no underage wizard can participate; a bit of cheating ? et voila! a fourteen year old enters the lists (and stays there). The hosts gain an unfair advantage (an extra champion), the guests understandably outraged, but there is nothing to be done about it. Harry, the second Hogwarts champion, has *no* de jure standing whatsoever ? he simply shouldn't be there, but it doesn't deter him from participating and winning the tournament. What exists de facto is eventually legitimised. And the rules in effect loose their meaning and cease to be. From belviso at attglobal.net Fri May 5 01:27:17 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 21:27:17 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter References: Message-ID: <006301c66fe3$0cc3dda0$6a98400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151895 a_svirn: Incidentally, is it possible to be "de facto legitimate"? I though legitimacy implies conformity to rule or law, in other words, being *de jure*. Anyway. Because of this "culture of the game", as you put it, the rules simply aren't working. There is a rule that no underage wizard can participate; a bit of cheating - et voila! a fourteen year old enters the lists (and stays there). The hosts gain an unfair advantage (an extra champion), the guests understandably outraged, but there is nothing to be done about it. Harry, the second Hogwarts champion, has *no* de jure standing whatsoever - he simply shouldn't be there, but it doesn't deter him from participating and winning the tournament. What exists de facto is eventually legitimised. And the rules in effect loose their meaning and cease to be. Magpie: I have to agree with a_svirn here. We're talking about the practical meaning, not semantics. If one lives in an area where there is no one to enforce the law, or for whatever reason people are allowed to break the laws without any consequences, for instance, it is usually called a "lawless" place. If you're "allowed" to cheat the rules might as well not exist. There's a difference between "rules" and "what you can get away with on a given day." -m From h.m.s at mweb.co.za Fri May 5 10:32:50 2006 From: h.m.s at mweb.co.za (H.M.S) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 12:32:50 +0200 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny Message-ID: <005201c6702f$5a35b1c0$74d117c4@Sharon> No: HPFGUIDX 151896 Betsy Hp said: "I will say that this fight struck me as very nasty. (Virgin vs. slut fights usually are. Hair-pulling generally follows.) And I'm not entirely sure what started it. I mean, yes, Ron and Harry walk in on Ginny making out with Dean in a hallway and Ron protests. But I don't get the level of Ginny's anger..........The fight, taken in and of itself, does not make sense" The fight scene makes perfect sense to me. As we find out later - Ginny was taking Hermione's advise to date other boys; to stop making a fool of herself over Harry, etc - BUT SHE STILL LIKED HARRY. Now she gets caught in a compromising (of sorts) situation and Ron acts like a dorky younger brother and makes a few comments which emphasises something she didn't particularly want HARRY to witness. Sometimes we blow up our anger out of proportion because we know that we are in the wrong, or being foolish & silly. (Does this make sense?) Sharon From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri May 5 13:31:53 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 13:31:53 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151897 Geoff: > This thread is degenerating into one of those "table tennis" > exchanges where those of us looking in merely switch our > bemused attention from one contributor to the other - and it is > plain daft. >a_svirn: > And here I thought you deprecate abrasive comments. Why not > turn your attention to other threads, if this one exasperates > you? Geoff: I do dislike abrasive comments. I don't consider what I said was abrasive ? merely mildly critical. I have to admit that I was feeling wicked last night and wrote this message very tongue-in-cheek. I set out to try to tickle at least a couple of sleeping dragons and I think I partially succeeded. :-) I have no wish to turn to other threads; this one interests me far more than the interminable considerations about Snape's motives. It is just that, having been credited with inventing the phrase "table tennis" - where two or more contributors indulge in a flurry of posts along the line of "Yes you do"/"No I don't" - I know, from off-group discussions with other members that we often wish such messages would just reach a "let's agree to disagree" position of stasis. I am not exasperated; I used the word "daft" deliberately. Perhaps I should explain. Although I have lived fro most of my life in the South of England ? 45 years in London and currently 12 years in the West of England ? I am a North countryman and spent a lot of my childhood there so I have a North country sense of humour. One interpretation of the use of "daft" is that it is used to express "amused irritation" which may seem a contradiction in terms. It is the sort of approach I would have used in teaching when a pupil persistently broke my flow by asking questions designed to interrupt and would have received a diplomatic put down after a while. > a_svirn: > Anyway. Because of this "culture of the game", as you put it, the > rules simply aren't working. There is a rule that no underage wizard > can participate; a bit of cheating - et voila! a fourteen year old > enters the lists (and stays there). Geoff: A fourteen year-old who did not put his name into the competition. His name was placed there as part of a carefully camouflaged plot for his k idnap, torture and assassination. a_svirn: > The hosts gain an unfair advantage (an extra champion), the guests > understandably outraged, but there is nothing to be done about it. Geoff: Consider the 1936 Berlin Olympics . a_svirn: > Harry, the second Hogwarts champion, has *no* de jure standing > whatsoever - he simply shouldn't be there, but it doesn't deter him > from participating and winning the tournament. What exists de > facto is eventually legitimised. And the rules in effect loose their > meaning and cease to be. Geoff: Again, he didn't want to participate; he was told by Crouch that he had to because he had (unknowingly) been drawn into a binding magical contract. He didn't want to take part or win. > a_svirn: > Incidentally, is it possible to be "de facto legitimate"? I though > legitimacy implies conformity to rule or law, in other words, being > *de jure*. > Magpie: > I have to agree with a_svirn here. We're talking about the practical > meaning, not semantics. If one lives in an area where there is no one > to enforce the law, or for whatever reason people are allowed to break > the laws without any consequences, for instance, it is usually called a > "lawless" place. If you're "allowed" to cheat the rules might as well not > exist. There's a difference between "rules" and "what you can get away > with on a given day." Geoff: I agree there is a problem, certainly in the real world, in this area. Situations arise where a de facto event tends to become de jure. Take the Russian Communist r?gime which existed for over 70 years from 1918. This was the result of an armed uprising and struggle. It was a de facto s tructure. Yet, over the years. Its existence was recognised by other countries, partly because they couldn't do anything about it, and ultimately its actions and laws etc. were recognised which made them de jure. The same argument could be applied for a r?gime such as Castro's Cuba since its inception. In this sort of scenario, Magpie's "lawless" place becomes a place where the rulers set the laws to suit themselves. Look for example at Mugabe's Zimbabwe, where the government ignores rulings made by its own Supreme Court because it doesn't please the head of state and "what you can get away with" /does/ become the "rules". And that ain't semantics. From pegdigrazia at yahoo.com Fri May 5 15:24:27 2006 From: pegdigrazia at yahoo.com (Peg DiGrazia) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 08:24:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060505152427.53556.qmail@web42202.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151898 BetsyHP wrote (snipped): >I have sisters. I'm incredibly familiar with the virgin vs. slut fight. (Um, to not shock >anyone unfamiliar with such battles: it can be over how many boys you've held hands >with if you're young enough.) I wasn't aware boys took part in such battles, and I >ever knew it took place between brothers and sisters. But there we are. Peg now: Brothers do tend to be overprotective of their little sisters. Ron never gave much thought to Ginny's love life when it was in the abstract, but seeing it face-to-face was a shock to him, I think. (I'm the baby of the family with brothers and sisters, and my brothers still act shocked when they see me drink an alcoholic beverage. I'm 37.) And I don't have the book in front of me, but isn't it Ginny who really escalates the "virgin vs. slut" aspect of the fight? Ron doesn't want Ginny to be a "slut," which is a typical brotherly feeling, but Ginny mocks Ron for being a "virgin," which seems more like an adolescent girl thing. Betsy (more snips): >But I don't get the level of Ginny's anger. She was making out with a guy in a >hallway. A corridor that is described as a "usual shortcut up to Gryffindor Tower". >So it's not like she isn't aware that she's exposing herself to comment. Peg again: Just guessing, of course, but maybe the level of Ginny's anger has to do with the fact that Harry is with Ron? Ginny has had romantic feelings for Harry since she was 10 years old, and really she's only dated other boys to try to get over him. She probably does genuinely like Dean, but on some level she may feel like she's using him, and being confronted with the true object of her desire must be humiliating. Also, she might feel that her chances with Harry will be even smaller if he thinks she's serious about Dean (or worse, if HE thinks she's a "slut.") I'm not a big fan of "spunky" Ginny and I mostly agree with your (ruthlessly snipped) comments about her rage, but I don't necessarily take JKR's interview as proof that there's not something deeper going on with Ginny. Teenaged girls take EVERYTHING personally and to heart, so I don't see her anger as out-of-character for any adolescent girl. They haven't figured out how to control themselves yet, and the whole hormone thing needs to be taken into account. Hopefully Ginny will grow up and calm down quite a bit in book 7. --------------------------------- New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Sherry at PebTech.net Fri May 5 16:14:21 2006 From: Sherry at PebTech.net (Sherry) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 16:14:21 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151899 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Goddlefrood" wrote: > > WC (Is this right?) wrote: > > It seems to me that one's memory of what happened when one is being > bullied would become embellished over the years. > > > > Am i wrong? > > Goddlefrood says: > > This is self-explanatory and shows that Snape could not have > embellished the memory, but that it was exactly how it happened - the > greasy little ... > > A Bientot > Amontillada adds: Goddlefrood is right. I want to point out one more thing about the memory and James: this was only ONE incident in James' life, one trick he pulled. It isn't the sum total of what James was like. I don't see this memory as JKR revealing that James was nothing better than a nasty prankster. That was Harry's initial reaction, but Harry is a teenaged orphan whose only previous image of his father had been completely heroic. I take it as what Sirius and Lupin tried to explain to Harry: evidence that James was a great deal more complicated than the "good guy/bad guy" division in his boyish view. Amontillada From kellymolinari at yahoo.com Sat May 6 00:30:15 2006 From: kellymolinari at yahoo.com (Kelly Molinari) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 00:30:15 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: <20060504130229.59995.qmail@web37209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151900 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, catherine higgins wrote: > > > > Tonks wrote: Lets say LV== death Lily== Love and Harry== ? > > Catherine: > Redemption? That would go with the pattern, but I don't think it advances us any further. > Kelly inquires: Could it be LV=?ath, Lily==love and Harry==salvation? I don't want to sound like I am sending this down the Christianity road ( because I'm not) but I have always thought of Harry as salvation --- the salvation of the Wizarding World. One of the definitions of salvation is: the preservation from destruction or failure, deliverance from danger or difficulty (Merriam-Webster Online). On the smaller scale we have Voldemort killing individual Wizards, and Lily's love saving the life of her child. But on the grand scale we have the Dark Lord causing the destruction and possible extinction (death)of the Wizarding World through his actions to purify the wizard race. We have a supreme sacrifice, made out of love, that allows "the chosen one" to be preserved from destruction. And because of that we have that "chosen one" able to vanquish this dark force, thus delivering the Wizard race from it's difficult time. I know Harry jokes about running off to save the world with Ginny but isn't that what he's supposed to do. Kelly, the meanmommyfish, who must go give some dirty kids a bath. From minluko at yahoo.com Sat May 6 02:43:41 2006 From: minluko at yahoo.com (minluko) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 02:43:41 -0000 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151901 >Angie: >I think it's important to remember that nowhere is Hermione described >as pretty minluko: It is not exactly right. Just reread "The Yule Ball" chapter in GoF :"Krum was at the front of the party, accompanied by a pretty girl in blue robes...". Also, this McLaggen guy in HBP doesn't seem like someone who will go out with a plain girl. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 6 03:10:26 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 03:10:26 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151902 Note: As Yahoo seems to have eaten all the messages posted today, I'm reposting this one. (If it's the original posts, I'll delete it.) With apologies to Geoff and to anyone else who's tired of discussing Snape, I can't get the man out of my mind. I know perfectly well that he's a fictional character, but I worry and wonder about him as if he were real and feel thwarted because I can't do anything about the predicament he has landed himself in. (I'm not worried about Harry; he'll suffer, but he'll triumph in the end. Maybe even grow up emotionally as well as legally, since the book is IMO as much a bildungsroman as a heroic quest. But Snape's fate, like his loyalties, is much less cut and dried.) My concern is this. Snape has nowhere to go except to Voldemort (where, I think, DD wanted and expected him to go at the end of the year given that he assigned him the DADA position). If he's ESE! or OFH!, then it doesn't matter. He's wicked, he'll stay wicked, and that's that. But if he's DDM!--if he killed Dumbledore against his will because he had no choice--it matters very much. What will he do now? What *can* he do? IMO, in the past, he's used his considerable ingenuity and his position at Hogwarts to "slither out of action" when the DEs expected him to join in their various evil pursuits, whether that was raiding the MoM or baiting Muggles at the QWC. But now the war is on. Snape has lost his position at Hogwarts and with it his role as double agent. (Even if Draco had killed Dumbledore without Snape's involvement, he would have lost the job as a result of the DADA curse and there would be no one left to spy on.) Snape can't show his face in the WW without risking arrest or assassination. And worse, Voldemort will expect him to show his loyalty by participating in the various raids and other DE activities, maybe even commit some murders on his own. I suppose he could fake the murders using the Draught of Living Death, but how would the Order know he had done that if he can't communicate with them? How can he keep from committing further crimes and further splitting his soul? IMO, he's already suffering mental anguish, shown by the comparison of him to Fang in the burning house, kept from surfacing and incapacitating him only through his superb Occlumency. Any additonal crimes will only make matters worse, making it still more difficult to forgive himself. What, then, can he do? Does anyone think that he can, as a reward for killing Dumbledore, ask for an assignment that doesn't involve anything so crude as an Unforgiveable Curse, such as potion making, or teaching young DEs (Draco and possibly Theo Nott) whose Head of House he formerly was, or working behind the scenes to engineer a prison break (with the intent of undermining Lucius Malfoy's loyalty to LV)? Any other ways in which he might continue to "slither out of action" while still maintaining the appearance of loyalty to LV? Most important, how can DDM!Snape help Harry when the whole Order sees him as "a murderin' traitor" (as they once saw Sirius Black), especially if he's forced to commit further crimes to keep his cover? And where do all those healing skills revealed in HBP fit in? Ideas, anyone? What do you think Snape will be up to, mostly off page, in Book 7? Surely all those revelations about him in HBP don't lead to a dead end on the tower. Carol, knowing that it's silly to worry about a fictional character whose fate and redemption are outside her control but concerned for Snape's soul nonetheless From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sat May 6 04:18:34 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 04:18:34 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151903 Carol: > Ideas, anyone? What do you think Snape will be up to, mostly off page, > in Book 7? Surely all those revelations about him in HBP don't lead to > a dead end on the tower. zgirnius: I have been giving this matter some thought. First, I think your suggestion of 'faking' crimes could be an option, but it owuld be hard to do if Snape were part of (in command of) a group. An alternative way out might be to leak the information about the raid in advance to the Order...if they showed up in force it would be a reason to call a raid off. I can see ways around the problem of being believed. First, I have seen a suggestion somewhere online (maybe even here!) that Snape's Patronus might change to a Phoenix. Since people in the Order would know thay was Dumbledore's Patronus, they might believe a message such a Patronus brought. Alternatively, where did Fawkes go? I bet oif he brought a message, it would be taken seriously... Personally I doubt the events of the Tower were part of a worked out plan. But if they were, Dumbledore would have seen the problem just as you and I do. He would have shared this part of the plan with someone, and so Snape would have a secret contact within the Order. (If this scenario holds, I vote for Aberforth as the contact). I can also see one duty Voldemort might assign Snape instead of killing Muggles (or whoever). I think it is possible he might be getting antsy about his Horcruxes merely from Slughorn's presence at the school all year. Did Dumbledore know of his interest in a seven-part soul? Also, the Ministry was aware of Dumbledore's disappearances. And what they know, I suspect, Voldemort also knows, through one source or another. We also know that Voldemort has entrusted Horcruxes to his DEs in the past. (Lucius and the Diary for sure, Bellatrix and the locket, I also suspect). He might have Snape do something to protect one of the other Horcruxes. Finally, I am not so sure that Snape will first encounter Harry during the final, climactic sequence in which Harry defeats Voldemort. I think it is possible Harry may meet him along the way. I don't have any ideas about his healing abilities. But I wonder about his alternative way to deal with Dementors. Is this something Voldemort knows about/could use? Or will it come up in some other way? From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sat May 6 04:31:24 2006 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 04:31:24 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151904 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote:(regarding Snape) > What, then, can he do? Does anyone think that he can, as a reward for killing Dumbledore, ask for an assignment that doesn't involve > anything so crude as an Unforgiveable Curse, such as potion making, or teaching young DEs (Draco and possibly Theo Nott) whose Head of House he formerly was, or working behind the scenes to engineer a prison break (with the intent of undermining Lucius Malfoy's loyalty to LV)? Most important, how can DDM!Snape help Harry when the whole Order sees him as "a murderin' traitor" (as they once saw Sirius Black), especially if he's forced to commit further crimes to keep his cover? And where do all those healing skills revealed in HBP fit in? > > Ideas, anyone? Doddie here: I've been worrying too so don't feel bad..I've been worrying since reading about Snape and Wormtail at Spinner's End. First off I don't necessarily subscribe any of the Snape theories other than I think Snape has played his role well as a double agent (and no double agent will ever have clean hands and as time progresses I believe any double agent's hands will become more and more filthy). Of course while discussing Snape one always must ask why did DD trust him? I am of the opinion that DD trusted Snape to continue as serving as a double agent. I think this is why DD and Snape were exchanging "heated" words that Hagrid overheard...DD was insisting that Snape continue his job. Hence Dd trusts Snape to simply "be hisself", or at the least to continue his role as the double spy..hoping that when push came to shove he would do the right thing, rather than the easy thing. It definitely seemed that killing DD was not such an easy thing for Snape to do. I'm sure that Bella's accusations at Spinner's End were not the first being layed against Snape and I think Snape was quite honest when he told bella his role in the Vance/Bones murders.(although they may have been given the draught of the living death first) I think children often have great instincts on who to trust and the only child we have ever seen appear to trust Snape was Malfoy(and perhaps Crabbe and Goyle)...Ron, Hermione, Harry, Neville, the Twins, even Percy don't trust Snape. Most only trust Snape because DD trusts him. I'd hate to see Harry's trust radar to be so far off. Hence after HBP we have Snape with no double agent role to play--the more I think on it, the more I think about what Wormtail's role has been these past years. When a double agent looses one house he simply goes to reside in the "other". First I think Snape will go to the Malfoys and try to convince them to hide Draco--which Bella will quash...actually I wouldn't be surprised if whereever Snape and Draco fled if Voldemort wasn't there already. Snape really has no choice now he must follow Voldy's orders...until (if he's not evil) he can help Harry the most; or until Snape flees on his own and goes into hiding(unlikely given the coward speech at the end of HBP)... Given that Snape was still quite proud of being *THE* Half-Blood Prince at the end of HBP I wouldn't be surprised if Snape is so angry that Harry was the one in the prophecy and not him.(anyone know when Snape's b-day is?) The first speech Snape gives in SS/PS may reflect upon his character more than any of us believed before-- bottle fame, brew glory and the like...(quite an amusing thought to have Snape weaken Voldemort by slipping him a "mickey") So, in short, Snape will do Voldy's bidding(probably killing those most difficult to kill-order members that also work in the ministry- poor arthur)...he has no choice really...he'll be back living under the radar, with the other DE who is also forced under the radar, Wormtail who is quite accomplished at fooling those close to him..the life debt twins! If Voldie would ever send out any followers to actually kill Harry I'd bet his top three would be Snape, Wormtail and Bella...I wonder if this is what DD thought too? Oh, and since you asked...his healing skills. I predict that Snape will heal Ron. Doddie (Who thinks Snape will kill a Weasley just because I love to loathe Snape and because that's the type of game I think he plays..Who also wonders if DD doled out Snape's punishment(which is really just a "natural consequece")--to kill him
..) p.s. I also wonder how many other prophecies DD may have heard from Trelawney...(thus far we have seen her speak about Harry, Wormtail, Voldie, and perhaps Snape/Draco....and obtusely DD) From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sat May 6 04:40:59 2006 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 04:40:59 -0000 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151905 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "minluko" wrote: > > >Angie: >I think it's important to remember that nowhere is Hermione described > >as pretty > minluko: It is not exactly right. Just reread "The Yule Ball" chapter in GoF :"Krum was at the front of the party, accompanied by a pretty girl in blue robes...". Also, this McLaggen guy in HBP doesn't seem like someone who will go out with a plain girl. Doddie here: Not to mention that out of every single girl at Hogwarts and all the fans he has throwing themselves at him, Victor asked Hermione.. Harry describes Hermione as he would a sister...I always viewed Hermione as one who "cleans up well" (I view ron the same way)... I like that Hermione doesn't spend hours on her hair every day. She should "dress- up/make-up" when she feels like it not because of what other's may think. I love that she's comfortable in her own skin. Doddie From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat May 6 04:51:42 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 04:51:42 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151906 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kelly Molinari" wrote: > Kelly inquires: > > Could it be LV=death, Lily=love and Harry=salvation? the salvation of the Wizarding World. > snip) > But on the grand scale we have the Dark Lord causing the destruction > and possible extinction (death)of the Wizarding World through his > actions to purify the wizard race. We have a supreme sacrifice, made out of love, that allows "the chosen one" to be preserved from > destruction. And because of that we have that "chosen one" able to > vanquish this dark force, thus delivering the Wizard race from it's > difficult time. > > I know Harry jokes about running off to save the world with Ginny but isn't that what he's supposed to do. > Tonks: To add to this, I think that JKR has said that Harry is "every boy" and many folks have said that he is "everyman", so I guess he is a stand in for the human race too. Or Adam to Ginny's Eve. And, of course, the beauty of the series is that one person can represent so many different things at the same time. But I am still trying to understand how is the energy or power of Love stronger than Evil/Death? Maybe the reason we have Lily without a wand is to show us that while it appears that Lily is defenseless she in fact has a more powerful weapon, that of sacrificial Love. Here is a young woman, unarmed, told to stand aside; which shows us that the most powerful Dark wizard sees her as no threat and is not at all afraid of her, not even enough to exert any energy to AK her at that point. She is a harmless nat. But in this case the harmless nat wins the game for `everyman'? What is it about the ancient magic that makes this possible? Why is Love so powerful that it can overcome even Death? Tonks_op From enlil65 at gmail.com Sat May 6 06:25:21 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 01:25:21 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: References: <1789c2360605032119x17bb011ct61d7a5ad986251e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1789c2360605052325o471edf0dxc24815945530214@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151907 On 5/4/06, Tonks wrote: > Let us look at LV, Lily and Harry from a different angle. Take the > personalities out of it and look at what each might represent as > concepts. > > Lets say LV= death Lily= Love and Harry= ? > > Lily implies something pure. And this brings to mind the Unicorn. So > what happens when evil touches something pure? When evil murders the > innocent? When Death and Love meet? Remember these are important > themes to Rowling. I am trying to grab at a philosophical idea I > think. Help!! There are folks here much more knowledgeable than I am > in this area. > > Trying to think my way to the ancient magic, but it is very hard to > do. But it is exciting to try to crack the mystery. Like a > detective. But I am a bit stumped on this one. There are pieces > missing? what are they? > > Death is Immortal. Death can not be killed. Death can only kill. But > Love is stronger. Why? Again what happens when death means something > pure. When death meets the greatest form of Love? > > Looking for a little brainstorming session here. Any takers?? I'd like to say something, though with the disclaimer that it is going to be lame. I'm neither a psychologist nor a philosopher, nor do I play one on TV. Here's something to think about. Each of us has the capability of being Voldemort. We learn to control that power, that sense of being all-powerful and self-important. It's an urge that has to be tempered. If we don't watch out, that "thing" rises up periodically and threatens to take over. If it succeeds, horrible things result: we hurt others, can even murder, torture, all with the goal of self-preservation and protection of the privileged view. This beast is tempered with love and understanding. When we understand that no one person's view is superior or privileged, that we are equals; when we have empathy for others and see that they experience just as we do, then we see from a higher plane. It's higher because it accomodates a wider field of view, recognizing the views of others as being just as valid as our own, accomodating differences. This is even true in physics: there is no privileged frame of reference. In a way, I see Voldemort and Harry as a conglomerate: it's as if they are different components of the same person, locked in a struggle because they literally can't escape one another. (The failed curse that connects them makes this a bit more literal, perhaps.) In this context, love is powerful because it is capable of subduing the beast. As for why that is true--that is something I have experienced, but can't explain. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sat May 6 09:25:02 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 09:25:02 -0000 Subject: SHIP Ginny's love life (was Harry/Ginny) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151908 Yahoomort has been hungry today. Let's see if this posts. Unlike people of higher intelligence :coughcarolcough:, I didn't save my original and am doing a rerun from memory. Betsy Hp said (re: Ron catching Ginny and Dean snogging): > But I don't get the level of Ginny's anger. She was making out with > a guy in a hallway. A corridor that is described as a "usual > shortcut up to Gryffindor Tower". So it's not like she isn't aware > that she's exposing herself to comment. Also, it's not like Ron has > been policing Ginny. He didn't realize she was dating Michael > Corner. And he didn't realize that she'd started dating Dean until > she told him. > > If Ron had been dogging Dean and Ginny's every move, I could > understand the level of rage Ginny flies into at this moment. But > from what I've read, this is the first Ron says anything. And he's > not really out of bounds. I can't see any big brother being happy > with his sister making out in a public corridor. (Big sisters > generally don't approve of such things either. ) (major snippage all around) Ginger: Let's take a look at what we know of the Sex Life of Ginny Weasley and How Her Brothers React. PS- crush on Harry. Little girl crush. No reaction from brothers. CoS- crush on Harry. Allegedly sent him a singing Valentine, which F&G mocked. Personally I think there was something with Tom Riddle, the very least of which was that she was flattered by his attention and very naive as to his intentions. It almost gets her killed. The 4 brothers at Hogwarts are made very aware of how much they would miss her and wish they could protect her. She gets a reputation with them as trusting and vulnerable beyond that which is normal in brother/sister realtionships. PoA- gets about as much page time as Molly's dish water. Crush on Harry assumed. GoF- Goes to Yule Ball w/ Neville. Brothers don't react, but then, wouldn't you trust your kid sister with Neville? I know I would. Still actually crushing on Harry. Shows character by not breaking her date with Neville. Meets Michael Corner, although we don't know about it at that time. OoP- Has been dating Michael in secert. Now we get to the juicy stuff. After the Hog's Head (see the final pages of ch 16) meeting, Ron finds out that Ginny has been dating Michael. First he gags on his butterbeer and spills it down his front, then he asks which one Michael was, after which he announces that he didn't like him. Upon finding that Ginny no longer fancies Harry, he is "quivering with indignation". He asks why she didn't tell him, and Hermione replies that Ginny knew that he'd take it badly. Hermione asks him not to harp on it. He says he will do no such thing, but continues "to chunter under his breath all the way down the street". When Ron finds out that she ditched Michael (ch 38), he is delighted. He then hints that she find someone better, hinting at Harry. When she says she has chosen Dean, Ron upends the chess board. On to HBP- In ch 6, they are in F&G's shop. Ginny is looking at love potions, but F&G won't sell one to her. They've heard she "has about five boys on the go". She tells them that whatever they have heard from Ron is a big fat lie. I find this suspicious. How does she know they have heard it from Ron? OK, he's at Hogwarts, so he's the obvious one. How does she know that "whatever" they have heard is a big fat lie? Just from that one sentance? How does she know that it is Ron doing the exaggerating rather than F&G? This says "off-page conversations" to me. She tries to change the subject, but they ask point blank if she is going with Dean. She tells them that she is, but he is one boy, not five. She again tries to change the subject, but they ask what about Michael. She tells them she dumped him, and they ask if she's not moving through boyfriends too fast. Hmm, two boyfriends from the middle of her 3rd year (Yule Ball) to the beginning of her 5th year? And they think it's "moving through boyfriends... too fast"? What has Ron been telling them? Ginny turns on Fred with a Molly-like glare and tells him it's none of his business. She also tells Ron not to tell tales. Why the glare? After only a couple of questions and a comment? I think she is tired of hearing about it. This points a finger on Ron to me. Only a few weeks have elapsed from the train in OoP, when he finds out that she is seeing Dean, to her being sick of conversation about him. My guess is that Ron's been harping. On the train in the next chapter, Pansy mentions to Blaise that lots of boys like Ginny, and that even he, Mr. Hard to Please, thinks she's good looking. No reaction from brothers as they aren't there. Now we hit ch. 14. The big blow-up. I think we've seen that Ron has a history with Ginny where her love life is concerned. He didn't pay much attention before Michael- he didn't even know they had broken up, but now that she's with Dean, he's not only talking to her, but to F&G as well. We've not seen any animosity between Ron and Dean in the past that would account for his hostility, nor do we have any record of him confronting Dean or demanding to know his intentions. After Ginny sends Dean back to the common room, she turns on Ron and says "let's get this straight once and for all. It is none of your business who I go out with or what I do with them". Ooh, "once and for all"? That's not something you say the first time someone comments on something. That's pretty much up there with "for the last time" or "I've told you a million times". It's none of his business what she does with them? What has he been saying she has done? He says in the corridor that he doesn't want people "thinking" she's a... but in that conversation, he doesn't question what she is actually doing. Did we miss a conversation outside of Harry's PoV where he did ask what she had been doing with all those guys? It could be. Not much is said after her breakup with Dean, only that Ron and Harry agree that she is too popular for her own good (ch24). When she and Harry get together, Ron doesn't mind a bit, much to Harry's surprise. Whew. This is longer than my original. Back to your question: Where did Ginny's anger come from? I speculate that this has been building up, mostly off-page, but with enough hints on-page, that the incident in ch. 14 was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ginger, glad she doesn't have older brothers. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat May 6 10:13:21 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 10:13:21 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151910 My yesterday's reply did not materialize, so I think I'll try again. > > a_svirn: > > Anyway. Because of this "culture of the game", as you put it, the > > rules simply aren't working. There is a rule that no underage wizard > > can participate; a bit of cheating - et voila! a fourteen year old > > enters the lists (and stays there). > > Geoff: > A fourteen year-old who did not put his name into the competition. His > name was placed there as part of a carefully camouflaged plot for his k > idnap, torture and assassination. a_svirn: Yes we all are aware of that. But it wasn't the issue under discussion. > > a_svirn: > > The hosts gain an unfair advantage (an extra champion), the guests > > understandably outraged, but there is nothing to be done about it. > > Geoff: > Consider the 1936 Berlin Olympics . a_svirn: Well, I have to say, I have some reservations about Dumbledore, but even so I wouldn't equate him with Hitler. > a_svirn: > > Harry, the second Hogwarts champion, has *no* de jure standing > > whatsoever - he simply shouldn't be there, but it doesn't deter him > > from participating and winning the tournament. What exists de > > facto is eventually legitimised. And the rules in effect loose their > > meaning and cease to be. > > Geoff: > Again, he didn't want to participate; he was told by Crouch that he > had to because he had (unknowingly) been drawn into a binding > magical contract. He didn't want to take part or win. a_svirn: Again, it's not about Harry. There is no need to defend him at every turn. But the very existence of this magical contract into which one can be "unknowingly drawn" is a perfect example of cheating incorporated into the rules. In our world there is no shortage of individuals who cheat and trick people into unfair agreements and contracts, but if and once you prove that foul play was involved such contracts can be annulled. These magical contracts cannot be declared null and void however much foul play evident to everyone is involved. That means that Dumbledore practically hands a perfect instrument for cheating to anyone interested. And does it officially in all accordance with the rules. What is even more important in-my-not-so-humble-opinion is that in our world any contract is at least a two-sided affair. And either there are means to ensure that *both* sides fulfill their obligations, or, if one of them fails to do so, such contract can be broken. A magical contract, however, is a one-sided bargain. Champions are compelled to go on, no matter what happens, but their hosts and the jury are not compelled to be fair and stick to the rules. This means making mockery out of the very idea of rules. The hosts break blatantly the most fundamental rule of the tournament by introducing an extra champion, the judges award points on a whim, but can you appeal, or leave the tournament in protest? No, you can not. All you can do is to grit you teeth a go on. You got ambushed and attacked, presumably by a member of the jury, and again you have no choice, but to stay. Even though by now you have every reason to believe that your life is in danger and not from dragons and mantichores either. (And if you express your indignation too loudly there is a giant bloke to shake sense into you.) Magical contracts in effect make hostages out of champions, completely at the mercy of the hosts and the jury and pretty much everyone else. The question is therefore WHY did Dumbledore feel it necessary to introduce them? To include one rule that renders all the other rules defunct? > > Magpie: If one lives in an area where there is no one > > > to enforce the law, or for whatever reason people are allowed to break > > > the laws without any consequences, for instance, it is usually called a > > "lawless" place. If you're "allowed" to cheat the rules might as well not > > exist. There's a difference between "rules" and "what you can get away > > with on a given day." > > Geoff: > I agree there is a problem, certainly in the real world, in this area. a_svirn: Ah, but do you think there is a problem in the Potterverse? Particularly at Hogwarts during the TWT? From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat May 6 10:44:05 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 10:44:05 -0000 Subject: Snape's memory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151911 > Amontillada adds: > > Goddlefrood is right. I want to point out one more thing about the > memory and James: this was only ONE incident in James' life, one trick > he pulled. It isn't the sum total of what James was like. > a_svirn: Certainly not. But it's illuminating nonetheless. Harry formed his initial opinion on Bellatrix because of the only one incident from Dumbledore's Pensive. The Longbottoms' torture trial is not the sum total of what she is. Surely there is more to her character that that. (She must be an efficient tutor, for instance, considering she taught Draco Occlumensy in a couple of months.) Still, it exposes her as a cruel and fanatical Death Eater. There must have been more to James' character than his propensity to bulling, but it does not alter that fact that he was a bully. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat May 6 11:10:13 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 11:10:13 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151913 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > My yesterday's reply did not materialize, so I think I'll try again. Geoff: I think we are all suffering from that problem. It took me two goes to get my last message on the board. > > > a_svirn: > > > Anyway. Because of this "culture of the game", as you put it, the > > > rules simply aren't working. There is a rule that no underage > wizard > > > can participate; a bit of cheating - et voila! a fourteen year > old > > > enters the lists (and stays there). > > > > Geoff: > > A fourteen year-old who did not put his name into the competition. > > His > > name was placed there as part of a carefully camouflaged plot for > > his kidnap, torture and assassination. > > a_svirn: > Yes we all are aware of that. But it wasn't the issue under > discussion. Geoff: To quote Dumbledore "Yes and no". Harry did not "enter the lists". He was press-ganged into them by friend Crouch!Moody. a_svirn: > > > Harry, the second Hogwarts champion, has *no* de jure standing > > > whatsoever - he simply shouldn't be there, but it doesn't deter > > > him > > > from participating and winning the tournament. What exists de > > > facto is eventually legitimised. And the rules in effect loose > > > their meaning and cease to be. > > > > Geoff: > > Again, he didn't want to participate; he was told by Crouch that > > he had to because he had (unknowingly) been drawn into a binding > > magical contract. He didn't want to take part or win. > > a_svirn: > Again, it's not about Harry. There is no need to defend him at every > turn. Geoff: I'm not, but it may be the way that we look at things from a slightly different standpoint. I seem to sense that you have an agenda to blame Harry and suggest that he cheated right from the beginning. He found out about the dragons because Hagrid took him out to show him and wouldn't reveal what they were going to see. He then knew that Viktor and Fleur would have been told and so he ensured that Cedric also knew to try to re-establish a level playing field. In general terms, the champions then knew what was in the offing for the remainig tasks, namely something underwater and a cup in a maze. a_svirn: > The > hosts break blatantly the most fundamental rule of the tournament by > introducing an extra champion... Geoff: I am trying to avoid a "table tennis" post, but I must return to my point that the hosts didn't introduce an extra person. This was due to Moody!Crouch's altering the Goblet of Fire. Perhaps Dumbledore should have given less credence to Barty Crouch Senior's judgment about the binding contract. But that would have spoiled the story..... From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat May 6 11:18:22 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 11:18:22 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: <20060505152427.53556.qmail@web42202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151914 SSSusan: Grrrr! *kicks Yahoo!Mort* Like everyone else, I issue this disclaimer: If this shows up in duplicate or triplicate, I'll delete. Betsy [discussing the scene where Ron & Harry run across a snogging Ginny & Dean]: > >But I don't get the level of Ginny's anger. She was making out > > with a guy in a hallway. A corridor that is described as > > a "usual shortcut up to Gryffindor Tower". So it's not like she > > isn't aware that she's exposing herself to comment. Peg: > Just guessing, of course, but maybe the level of Ginny's anger has > to do with the fact that Harry is with Ron? Ginny has had > romantic feelings for Harry since she was 10 years old, and really > she's only dated other boys to try to get over him. She probably > does genuinely like Dean, but on some level she may feel like she's > using him, and being confronted with the true object of her desire > must be humiliating. SSSusan: I totally agree with Peg that this is likely one of the things going on for Ginny. But I think the other thing which might explain the degree of her anger is the fact that she's sick to death of her brothers watching over her, commenting on whom she's dating, criticizing her for hopping from boy to boy, and generally (in her mind) interfering and treating her like a baby. I'm the youngest of 4, with 3 brothers, and sometimes you take out on the LAST one to say something the cumulative annoyance you feel over what the OTHER two have been harping about. You know? I don't have my HBP with me at the moment, so it may be *later* than this -- at Christmastime? -- when Ginny gets ticked at her brothers for sticking their noses into her private affairs, but I think it's pretty safe to assume that that's been an *ongoing* annoyance for her. So, place Ron here, pulling yet another Weasley Big Brother "I Know What's Best for You" Stunt, and add to it that it's happening in front of Harry, who as Peg points out, Ginny has never gotten over, and I can see things becoming volatile quickly. Peg added: > Also, she might feel that her chances with Harry will be even > smaller if he thinks she's serious about Dean (or worse, if HE > thinks she's a "slut.") SSSusan: Yep. This, too. Definitely. ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan P.S. I now see that Ginger has addressed this as well, with more canon detail (thank you, dear), but as I *do* have those dratted older brothers, I thought I would still comment. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat May 6 11:42:50 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 11:42:50 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151915 Carol [from a fantastic post, which zgirnius & SSSusan snip down to the final question]: > > Ideas, anyone? What do you think Snape will be up to, mostly off > > page, in Book 7? Surely all those revelations about him in HBP > > don't lead to a dead end on the tower. zgirnius: > First, I think your suggestion of 'faking' crimes could be an > option, but it owuld be hard to do if Snape were part of (in > command of) a group. An alternative way out might be to leak the > information about the raid in advance to the Order. SSSusan: I agree that I don't think Snape will be faking crimes -- seems rather hard to pull off and hard to "take credit for" to Order members. I like the idea of an advance tip-off of a raid or attack. Truthfully, I think such an action would mean Voldy *would* FINALLY be on to him, though, so I think it would have to be somewhere pretty far into the book/close to the conclusion -- or, alternatively, close to a revelation to the Order that Snape **is** still DDM. zgirnius: > I can see ways around the problem of being believed. First, I have > seen a suggestion somewhere online (maybe even here!) that Snape's > Patronus might change to a Phoenix. Since people in the Order > would know thay was Dumbledore's Patronus, they might believe a > message such a Patronus brought. Alternatively, where did Fawkes > go? I bet oif he brought a message, it would be taken seriously... SSSusan: Yep, I'd seen the suggestion of a phoenix patronus, too, but hadn't thought of Fawkes himself carrying a message. I think the latter would be *much* more effective than the former, which might just seem like a trick (and a horribly disrespectful one!) to Order members. I think one of these options, though, *following* what zgirnius first suggested -- a tip-off which protects the Order from attack -- might be enough for Snape to get a listen, at least from some Order members. zgirnius: > Personally I doubt the events of the Tower were part of a worked > out plan. But if they were, Dumbledore would have seen the problem > just as you and I do. He would have shared this part of the plan > with someone, and so Snape would have a secret contact within the > Order. (If this scenario holds, I vote for Aberforth as the > contact). SSSusan: Another excellent possibility. Aberforth will certainly (he will, right??) have a role in Book 7, and I think most of us are expecting it to pertain somehow to information about Albus. zgirnius: > I can also see one duty Voldemort might assign Snape instead of > killing Muggles (or whoever). I think it is possible he might be > getting antsy about his Horcruxes.... > He might have Snape do something to protect one of the other > Horcruxes. SSSusan: zgirnius, you're on a roll -- so many great ideas! If Snape-as-horcrux-protector were to happen, it would provide yet another possibility for Snape to assist Harry & the Order and thus, eventually, to prove his loyalty to DDM. I seriously doubt Harry would be very inclined to believe anything Snape simply *says* (in person or via a messenger), but combine it with some significant *action* that 1) assists the Order, and 2) clearly risks blowing Snape's cover to Voldy, and I can see many Order members being convinced. Might take Harry a tad longer. ;-) zgirnius: > I don't have any ideas about his healing abilities. But I wonder > about his alternative way to deal with Dementors. Is this > something Voldemort knows about/could use? Or will it come up in > some other way? SSSusan: Both are interesting possibilities. I can't quite imagine JKR tossing in that un-explained bit about Harry & Snape disagreeing on the best way to handle Dementors if it's not going to resurface, but I've no idea how. Another healing episode from Snape? It was certainly a *fascinating* scene when he healed Draco in HBP, but I'm not convinced it'll happen again. If it does, I'm inclined to think it'll involve a Weasley, Hermione, Neville or Harry himself. Siriusly Snapey Susan From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat May 6 11:55:40 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 11:55:40 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151916 SSSusan: Grrrr! *kicks Yahoo!Mort* Like everyone else, I issue > this disclaimer: If this shows up in duplicate or triplicate, I'll delete. Ceridwen: It looks like it's working again. Yay! Peg: > > Just guessing, of course, but maybe the level of Ginny's anger has to do with the fact that Harry is with Ron? *(snip)*...and being confronted with the true object of her desire must be humiliating. SSSusan: > I totally agree with Peg that this is likely one of the things going on for Ginny. But I think the other thing which might explain the degree of her anger is the fact that she's sick to death of her brothers watching over her, commenting on whom she's dating, criticizing her for hopping from boy to boy, and generally (in her mind) interfering and treating her like a baby. Ceridwen: I recall becoming over the top as a teenager just because I was embarrassed. Being caught in a clinch by an older brother who has been harping on just that thing would certainly do it; getting caught by that older brother in front of current and hoped-for boyfriends both would send me in, fists flying, I'm sure. I had no older brothers, but I had friends who were nearly as close, and at least as nosey as Ron and the twins appear to be. And, could a part of it be the baggage of living in a very un-private family, and in a communal setting like a boarding school? Teenaged girls need privacy and I don't see where Ginny would find much of it either at home or at school. Though, kissing in a corridor that is part of the normal traffic pattern isn't exactly the way to ensure privacy. It's almost as if she wanted to get caught. And when she did - remember that you should be careful of what you wish for - she got even more embarrassed. And, she's fifth year. Isn't that when CAPSLOCK!Harry appeared? This could also be the beginnings of Ginny breaking away from parents and such and growing into an adult. She did not seem OTT to me, considering. I was an emotional (train) wreck as a teen. I was moved into a less-than-private setting at sixteen, and resented it. And all those friends, though I loved them dearly, could have dropped off the face of the earth at times and I wouldn't have minded. Maybe all our different reactions are just played against our own growing up? Ceridwen. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat May 6 13:34:38 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 13:34:38 -0000 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151917 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "minluko" wrote: > > > > >Angie: > >I think it's important to remember that nowhere is Hermione described > > >as pretty > > minluko: > > It is not exactly right. Just reread "The Yule Ball" chapter in GoF > :"Krum was at the front of the party, accompanied by a pretty girl in > blue robes...". Also, this McLaggen guy in HBP doesn't seem like > someone who will go out with a plain girl. > > Doddie here: > > Not to mention that out of every single girl at Hogwarts and all the > fans he has throwing themselves at him, Victor asked Hermione.. Harry > describes Hermione as he would a sister...I always viewed Hermione as > one who "cleans up well" (I view ron the same way)... I like that > Hermione doesn't spend hours on her hair every day. She should "dress- > up/make-up" when she feels like it not because of what other's may > think. I love that she's comfortable in her own skin. > > Doddie > Angie again: Well, I stand corrected -- I forgot about the Yule Ball thing. But that's the only explicit reference, right? I know elsewhere Harry tells her he doesn't think she's ugly, but that's not quite the same thing, in my book. I'm not saying Hermione's unnattractive. I just don't know if she believes she is attractive, which would affect her self esteem, especially since Ron is so obviously attracted to Fleur, who is apparently quite fetching. :) There also seems a stark contrast to me between the way Fleur and Ginny are described, compared to Hermione -- like JKR goes out of her way to point out that Hermione may not be "conventionally" pretty. And don't get me wrong. I think that's a great message for young girls, most of whom are not like Fleur and Ginny. And Ron and McGlaggen and Victor were obviously attracted to her, for whatever reasons. So really, she can't be all that shabby in the looks department. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 6 14:26:34 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 14:26:34 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151918 > a_svirn: > Again, it's not about Harry. There is no need to defend him at every > turn. But the very existence of this magical contract into which one > can be "unknowingly drawn" is a perfect example of cheating > incorporated into the rules. In our world there is no shortage of > individuals who cheat and trick people into unfair agreements and > contracts, but if and once you prove that foul play was involved > such contracts can be annulled. Pippin: Foul play could not be proved, it was only suspected. There was no proof that Harry hadn't got around the age line or asked someone else to put his name in the goblet. Harry was a victim of identity theft -- a crime of which wizarding law may not be cognizant. In that case his situation might resemble mine a few years ago, when my brother's crazy ex bought herself a Jacuzzi using my credit. There was nothing in those days to stop the finance company from turning over the account to a collection agency which called me, sent me dunning notices, and caused my hitherto enviable credit report to break out in boils. When I reported all this to the police, they told me no crime had been committed against me. According to the law as it then was, my ex-SIL had defrauded the finance company, not me, and therefore I had no standing. It was up to the finance company to decide whether it had been defrauded and they were within their rights to presume that the contract was genuine and pursue their efforts to make me pay off the loan. In Harry's case, there was no way to let the Goblet know it had been defrauded, and therefore presumably no way to keep it from enforcing the penalties on Harry. Possibly they could have called off the whole contest -- but how could Dumbledore be sure that wasn't what the enemy wanted? In any case, I think we are all on the wrong track in calling the extra points for the second task any kind of evidence of favortism. All those points did was give Harry more time in the potentially lethal maze -- *not* what you would want if you were convinced that someone was rigging the contest to try to kill Harry. Dumbledore's fairness (and I do believe he thought it was only fair to credit Harry in the spirit of the rules) actually worked against his interest, assuming he was more interested in keeping Harry alive than in having him win a contest he didn't want him to have entered in the first place. Pippin From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat May 6 14:41:38 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 14:41:38 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605052325o471edf0dxc24815945530214@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151919 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy Wilkins" wrote: > > Here's something to think about. Each of us has the capability of > being Voldemort. (Snip)> > In a way, I see Voldemort and Harry as a conglomerate: it's as if they > are different components of the same person, locked in a struggle > because they literally can't escape one another. (The failed curse > that connects them makes this a bit more literal, perhaps.) In this context, love is powerful because it is capable of subduing the beast. Tonks: Yes, I have thought that at well. That perhaps amoung all else that she is doing we have the Alchemical process of becoming the gold. The higher self transformed from the base metal of LV(selfish) to the gold of Love. We each have the potential to be either LV or DD. Harry representing Everyman has the choice minute by minute to more toward one pole or the other. Perhaps the reason that Tom and Harry look so much alike is to show this point. It is our choices that determine what we become. We can become LV or DD. Hence, Harry is DD's man to the end. Tonks_op From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat May 6 14:53:55 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 14:53:55 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151920 Betsy HP wrote: > > But I don't get the level of Ginny's anger And that leads me to the final issue: Ginny's Rage. > > Ginny is angry throughout this chapter. And I can't find anything > that might have set it off. She's angry at the quidditch practice > (snapping at Ron for no reason). She's unreasonably furious in the > corridor. And her attack on Zacharius made no sense at all. > Zacharius had only made derisive comments about Ginny at the > beginning of the match. By the end Ginny had played well enough, > Zacharius couldn't say anything. *And* Ginny's team won (thanks in > part to some spectacular playing on Ginny's part). Why does she > feel the need to physically attack Zacharius at the end of the game? > > If JKR hadn't given that interview to the Mugglenet folks, I'd > consider this suspicious behavior pointing to some underlying > problem. Ginny's frightened by Voldemort's increasing power; Ginny > is being bothered by strange dreams she's afraid are connected to > Tom Riddle possessing her in CoS; Ginny really, really *hates* that > Bill is getting married and is taking it badly. IOWs, I'd think > there was a mystery there. > > But, having read JKR's interview I have a sinking feeling that this > is JKR writing "spunky". It doesn't work. There's a difference > between spunky and angry. In this chapter, Ginny is angry. She > only calms down when Ron gets a girlfriend. Ooh, maybe Ginny didn't > like the idea of Hermione dating her brother? Yeah, I don't buy it > either. > > Angie here (attempting to duplicate what she assures was a most eloquent reply that was apparently eaten by Yahoomort. Grrr!): I must say that Ginny's response didn't seem OOC to me at all. JKR has been building her character all along, given us bits here and there about the fact that she can get pretty riled up, as indicated by her proclivity for performing bat-bogey hexes. I agree that she was angry in the kissing scene, not spunky (she was spunky at the MOM). I have a few theories as to why she blew up in the hall. I suspect her response was a combination of the following factors: 1) Ginny probably has latent anger/resentment against some or all of her brothers. Although none of them strike me as being "mean", it can't have been easy being the only girl, and especially the youngest child, in a family of six brothers. I suspect that her brothers have angered her to the point that she has invoked the bat-bogey hex on them -- how else would Fred and George have known that Ginny was able to do that before she hexed Zacharias Smith in HBP? Further, as any girl who has had an older brother knows, any brother worth his salt both torments and (over)protects, which may also have angered Ginny. Don't forget that Fred and George were badgering Ginny about her "five" boyfriends at the beginning of HBP, based on Ron's misinformation. Could she have worried that Ron would exaggerate the hallway incident and report to the Twins? If one boyfriend turned into five, what would the hallway incident turn into in Ron's version of events? 2)Ginny was angry at Ron for embarrassing her in front of her current boyfriend and more importantly, the one she hoped would be her future boyfriend. She tells Harry at the end of HBP that she never gave up on him, so I'm sure she wouldn't want him to think she was a slut. Not good PR. To me, this explains the "Auntie Muriel" expose. She wanted to embarrass Ron to the same degree that he embarrassed her. Yes,it was vicious, but understandable, in my book. Why should we be surprised that the same girl who performs a bat- bogey hex on Zacharias simply b/c he was annoying her would get so angry when she thought her brother was accusing her of being a slut in front of her would-be future boyfriend? 3) It is also possible that she was angry b/c Harry didn't act jealous when he saw her kissing Dean. As you point out, the corridor was used as a shortcut and it seems that Ginny should have known she and Dean would likely be spotted by Harry and Ron as they returned to practice. I really don't see Ginny as manipulative (as choosing that spot deliberately to make Harry jealous, but I guess that's another thread); maybe subconsciously Harry's response or apparent lack thereof made her angry and she didn't even realize it herself. 4) I'm sure she's also tired of people insinuating that she's a child. Remember in OOP how Molly wouldn't let her stay to hear about what Voldemort was up to? Ginny as the only one who didn't get to stay. And Harry told her she was too young to help with the MOM in OOP. Especially since she wants Harry to see her as "girlfriend material" anything that implies she's still "a little girl", especially in front of Harry, is going to sting her. 5) She was also angry b/c Ron embarrassed her, but more importantly, himself, at Quidditch practice. I believe she feels Ron is not living up to his potential on the Quidditch field and she wants him to realize his potential. Maybe constructive criticism or encouragement would be more productive, but Ginny doesn't strike me as a warm-fuzzy person. 6) I do believe there is an element of Ginny being angry about Bill and Fleur. She seems to have a special fondness for Bill. I don't know if she thinks Fleur is just a pretty face or just not good enough for Bill or what, but she certainly doesn't like to see any guy act all googly around Fleur. Maybe it's part jealousy, b/c she's not the only "girl" in the family anymore, but maybe she just doesn't like to see the guys she cares about acting like prats because of a woman. She even accuses Harry of liking the way Fleur says his name. I believe Ginny thinks if Ron gets a girlfriend, he'll stop embarrassing the whole family with the way he acts around Fleur. 7) I don't know how likely it is, but maybe Ginny sees Ron's response as a sign that he would not approve of her being with any of his friends, which would, of course, would not bode well for her would-be relationship with Harry. 8) I also wonder if Ginny has had to endure other people making comments similar to the one Ron never got to finish? Ginny pulled her wand at the precise moment before Ron called her whatever he was going to call her. Not that it makes her a slut, but Ginny is pretty and popular and at age 15, is with her second boyfriend. Harry felt she was too popular for her own good. Even Pansy stated that a lot of boys like Ginny. Even though Ginny seems to not be the type to care what others say about her, if other people had teased/taunted her, Ron's near-comment might have been the last straw because it was the most hurtful of all, coming from her brother, rather than strangers. 9) Let's not forget: Ginny is her mother's daughter and is a redhead. :) I think she's inherited her mother's temper. At one point in HBP, it seems like she reminds Harry of Mrs. Weasley (can't remember when). 10) Finally, I do believe there is a legitimate reason for this scene. If Ginny gets this wound up about something that is obviously important to her, but in truth, does not involve life-or-death, how formidable will she be when faced with a situation involving someone she cares about that does involve life-or-death? We can't say, "Oh, if she gets this wound up over "small" things, she'll be of no use in a real crisis situation" because her behavior at the MOM proves she can handle herself in a crisis situation. JKR could have given Ginny any temperament that she wanted to, but she made her spunky and yes, sometimes, angry. I prefer to think there is a reason for this other than merely matching Harry with someone who has a strong personality: Could it be that this scene foreshadows that Ginny may be able to perform an Unforgiveable Curse and "mean it" (something Harry has yet to pull off)? My two Knut's worth. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat May 6 15:19:01 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 15:19:01 -0000 Subject: Could Harry Own the Riddle Home? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151921 Here's my wild theory for the day. Dumbledore was the wealthy man who owned the Riddle Home in GOF and he wills it to Harry. Prior to HPB, I'd always thought of Lucius as the wealthy man and I guess I have no real canon supporting that DD was wealthy, other than the fact that he seems to wear flashy clothes. Maybe he put up the $$ for Aberforth to buy the Hogshead? I can only see this as a real possibility if the Riddle Home has a role to play in Book 7. Maybe it's the location of a Horcrux? At first glance, it seems unlikely that LV would want a piece of his soul hidden in the home of his Muggle father, whom he hated. Then again, he did return there for refuge in GOF, and if it would be the last place that anyone suspects, then it would be a most excellent hiding place, perhaps with a touch of revenge mixed in. How fitting that part of the magic that makes LV immortal resides in the home of the man who ignored his very existence? And don't forget, DD did keep up with the Muggle news in that area, so he knew when Frank was killed, which implies his belief that LV still found the old homestead of some importance. For what it's worth. Angie From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 6 15:32:26 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 11:32:26 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship/legitimacy References: Message-ID: <00a201c67122$48037250$138c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151922 > Pippin: > Foul play could not be proved, it was only suspected. There > was no proof that Harry hadn't got around the age line or asked > someone else to put his name in the goblet. Harry was a victim of > identity theft -- a crime of which wizarding law may not be > cognizant. Magpie: That story about your SIL makes me break out in boils! Grrrrr! I'm so sorry you had to go through that. And yet, it still makes more sense to me than Harry in the TWT, perhaps because at least there there's a beaurocracy to cover it. In Harry's case there's a small group of people in charge who know all the facts and they still don't do anything. Harry's already disqualified by the "rules" since he's 14. So you've got an ineligible contestent becoming eligible because of a contract he didn't sign. Frankly, in the real world I think there would be more people to go after. Dumbledore, for one. He's supposed to be in charge of the "security," making sure people can't enter the tournament if they're too young. Then he seems to suggest that anyone at all could have entered had they just asked their older brother to put their name in the Goblet. You'd think he'd have something in place so you could only enter your own name! Plus there's the other rule of one champion for each school. It's not just that Harry's name goes into the Goblet that's a problem, it's the fact that his name comes out of the Goblet since Moody invented a fake school. So Harry's the Champion of nothing, a school that doesn't exist. Pippin: > In Harry's case, there was no way to let the Goblet know it had > been defrauded, and therefore presumably no way to keep it > from enforcing the penalties on Harry. Possibly they could have > called off the whole contest -- but how could Dumbledore be > sure that wasn't what the enemy wanted? Magpie: I'd think that even if the enemy did want that it would be a better thing to do than risking Harry's life, but everyone seems to be under the impression that Harry is, indeed, in the tournament because someone wants to kill him (though oddly people don't think of Voldemort being behind it as much as they should). Ironically, I'm sure late in the year Rita Skeeter writes some article that seems to suggest Harry could get out of the tournament somehow, though I don't remember it now. Of course, I also can't help but think how I would have gotten out of it if I were in it. Surely Harry could go through the motions without actually risking anything. They could have had Harry simply swim in the shallow part of the lake and allowed the other contestants to get their hostages, then retrieve Harry's later. They could have had him just run out his time with the dragon. He could have just stayed just inside the maze. That makes a lot more sense to protect him. It doesn't happen basically because the "magical contract" is really a magical plot device. JKR just wants something that says Harry is forced to compete as best he can in a contest. It's like the Pensieve--any child can understand wanting to be able to just "show someone a memory." It's only when you think about it more critically that the logic of it breaks down and you start asking exactly how it works. Same with the Goblet, I think. Pippin: Dumbledore's fairness (and I do believe > he thought it was only fair to credit Harry in the spirit of the > rules) actually worked against his interest, assuming he > was more interested in keeping Harry alive than in having > him win a contest he didn't want him to have entered in the > first place. Magpie: But that still goes to a_svirn's point, which is not that Harry is a big cheater himself. It's that Dumbledore gets to meddle in things when he thinks they need evening up but at other times--times when things are a lot more blatantly irregular--he doesn't do anything. For instance, his school having an extra champion is far more unfair and not in the spirit of the rules than Harry getting fewer points because he took the most time to come out of the lake. I don't even think the latter is not in the spirit of the rules any more than it would be in the spirit of the rules of basketball to say that someone should get points for scoring a basket after the buzzer because they stopped to help someone up who had fallen on their way to the basket. -m [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From spirittalks at gmail.com Sat May 6 17:22:39 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 13:22:39 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship/legitimacy References: Message-ID: <004d01c67131$adfea200$6401a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 151923 I was thinking about the binding magical contract that kept Harry in the TWI against all that is sensible and wondered yet again what would happen if he had not participated. When he fell asleep in the library on the eve of the second task and Dobby woke him with the answer to all his problems he tore off for the lake, barely making it in time. What would have happened had he been late or slept through it? Would he have been dragged with some sort of imperious like spell to the starting point? At one point he had a fleeting moment in which he considered running from Hogwarts before realizing that facing the tasks was better than facing the Dursleys. But what if he did run back to the Dursleys? With staircases that lead to different places every day and trick steps that trap students and cause them to get a detention for being late for class, a poltergeist who attacks students and basilisks in the pipes and binding magical contracts making 14 year olds compete against much more experienced students in dangerous tasks... you really have to wonder sometimes if the wizarding world isn't just a bit too kooky. Can you imagine being a muggle and receiving that letter for your child and investigating every tiny thing you can about the WW? Witches and Wizards know how great Hogwarts is because they've been there. Seeing it from a muggle point of view with my precious 11 year old daughter going off to this place... I'm not sure if I'd say yes or run and hide on a remote island hut. But as a 43 year old... boy I wish I'd received that letter! Kim From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat May 6 17:20:49 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 17:20:49 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151924 Geoff: I seem to sense that you have an agenda to blame Harry and suggest that he cheated right from the beginning. a_svirn: Well, you got it all wrong. I never said a word against Harry. It is the way the tournament is organized that raises my hackles. If anyone's integrity is in question it's Dumbledore's, not Harry's. Geoff: I am trying to avoid a "table tennis" post, but I must return to my point that the hosts didn't introduce an extra person. This was due to Moody!Crouch's altering the Goblet of Fire. a_svirn: And who was Moody/Crouch? More or less Dumbledore's deputy, wasn't he? I'd say it qualify him as a "host". And it was Hogwarts ? the school that hosted the event ? that got extra champion because of Crouch's actions. Pippin: Foul play could not be proved, it was only suspected. There was no proof that Harry hadn't got around the age line or asked someone else to put his name in the goblet. a_svirn: What do you mean "foul play could not be proved"? Foul play was there for everyone to see ?Hogwarts had an extra champion. You can hardly call it fair, can you? Was it Harry's fault or someone else's is quite another question. The point is that it was *not* fair, it was most certainly *against* the rules, and yet nothing was done to sort this mess out, because of the one rule that allows to play foul. Pippin: Possibly they could have called off the whole contest -- but how could Dumbledore be sure that wasn't what the enemy wanted? a_svirn: No, it was *im*possible -- because of the contract. Besides, why whishes of this hypothetical enemy of Harry Potter should matter to the delegations of Durmstrang and Bauxbatons? They came to participate in a major sporting event, not to be inducted into the Order of the Phoenix. Pippin: Dumbledore's fairness (and I do believe he thought it was only fair to credit Harry in the spirit of the rules) a_svirn: I am not sure that there is such thing as "spirit of the rules", though. Especially if this *spirit* works right against their *letter*. Besides, according to you Harry seems to be the only one who deserves fairness. What about Cedric and Krum? Why should they give up their fairly gained advantage because of this mysterious spirit? From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat May 6 18:33:22 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 18:33:22 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151925 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > Geoff: > I seem to sense that you have an agenda to > blame Harry and suggest that he cheated right from the beginning. > > a_svirn: > Well, you got it all wrong. I never said a word against Harry. It is > the way the tournament is organized that raises my hackles. If > anyone's integrity is in question it's Dumbledore's, not Harry's. Geoff: Well, if I "got it all wrong", it was possibly because the tournament was raising your hackles and you didn't make your points particularly clear. > Geoff: > I am trying to avoid a "table tennis" post, but I must return to my > point > that the hosts didn't introduce an extra person. This was due to > Moody!Crouch's altering the Goblet of Fire. > > a_svirn: > And who was Moody/Crouch? More or less Dumbledore's deputy, wasn't > he? I'd say it qualify him as a "host". And it was Hogwarts ? the > school that hosted the event ? that got extra champion because of > Crouch's actions. Geoff: The REAL Moody would probably have been in that position had he been there but you cannot blame Dumbledore and the school for Harry's name being in the Goblet. Crouch!Moody was working to his own agenda which was totally different from anything Dumbledore intended. If your suggestion above is taken seriously, then you are implying that Dumbledore clearly knew that he was an impostor and yet was allowing him to set up Voldemort's plan. From dossett at lds.net Sat May 6 19:21:45 2006 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 19:21:45 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship in Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151926 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > Joe: But cheating wasn't incorporated in the rules. It can still be > done. > > > > Let me see if I can clear this up. You think that the judges > giving points is cheating even if it is in the rules(right?). By > definition though if it is in the rules it isn't cheating. Since we > have no idea what may or may not have been in the rules we can't > just say that those points we cheating. > > > > > > Most major sports have traditions of trying to get around the > rules. In many cases these are some of the most "colorful" stories > in them. Still if you are caught you will be punished. > > a_svirn: > And that's exactly what I meant when I said that cheating was > incorporated into the rules. Because you are *not* punished if you > are caught cheating in the tournament. You don't even get > reprimanded. You get a pat on your shoulder and an assurance that no > harm done ? cheating is "traditional". And indeed so it is ? > everyone cheats. > Pat here - delurking because I have a comment: How do we know that anyone, if caught, goes unpunished? I have no recollection of anything from canon that discusses this. We are told that Madam Maxime is helping Fleur, but never shown it, although admittedly we see the effects (Fleur wasn't surprised by the dragons in the first task.) We are also told that Karkaroff is helping Krum, but ditto - we're never shown it, just the effect that Krum is likewise not surprised. We are also never shown Dumbledore helping either Cedric or Harry - the idea I got was that he was 'too noble' to engage in cheating - and that this was supposed to be a good thing. It's only Crouch!Moody that does the cheating - and I think it's also unfair to assume that that's why Dumbledore added him to the faculty in Harry's fourth year. The assumption (on may part, anyway) was that Moody was brought to Hogwarts because Karkaroff was going to be there, and K was known to be a former DE, so Harry might need extra protection. We are shown at the end of GOF that DD didn't suspect that his old friend wasn't really who he thought he was (the intelligence of this is left up to the reader to decide.) Moody *was not* brought to Hogwarts to help any champion cheat his way through the tournament! At any rate, where I'm going with this is to dispute your statement that cheating is incorporated in the rules. Everybody *is not* doing it - none of the Hogwarts staff is involved, except the afore-mentioned Crouch!Moody, who had his own agenda there, too (he wasn't interested in Harry winning for a good purpose, but to serve his master.) Any help that was given Harry outside of Crouch!Moody's interference was given at Crouch! Moody's behest - he got Hagrid to show Harry the dragons, he got Dobby to give Harry the gillyweed (and previously tried to get the information to Harry via Neville) and then in the third task, Crouch! Moody did it himself. I think that some distinction needs to be made here: I don't believe that cheating is *tolerated* but it is more or less expected (if only because it has happened in the past) and if the judges think they see evidence of it they turn a blind eye to it unless it should be blatently obvious. This is implied, to me, in Bagman's statements to Harry. ("Of course nobody would know. . ." pardon me for not having the exact quote) ~Pat (wondering if I made any sense at all. . .) From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 6 20:06:39 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 20:06:39 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: <00a201c67122$48037250$138c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151927 > Magpie: > Plus there's the other rule of one champion for each school. It's not just that Harry's name goes into the Goblet that's a problem, it's the fact that his name comes out of the Goblet since Moody invented a fake school. So Harry's the Champion of nothing, a school that doesn't exist. Pippin: But do the judges have power over the magical contract or is it in the sole discretion of the goblet? It appears they do not. That's why everyone keeps saying that the goblet is impartial -- supposedly none of the judges can influence it. Of course no magic is foolproof and Crouch did find a way. But even his influence was limited -- he couldn't make it choose Harry as the sole Hogwarts champion, which would have been much more convenient for his plans. The goblet was not looking the other way at Crouch's cheating. It chose as impartially as it always did, but it had been confunded into thinking there was another wizarding school so that Harry, as the sole contestant representing that school, was sure to be picked. The rule about being seventeen was not part of the original rules of the contest. It had been agreed on by the judges but there was no way to program the goblet to reject anyone under seventeen. That was why the age-line was needed. The judges could have ruled that Harry didn't have to compete, but IMO that wouldn't change the spell. IIRC one character suggests that they just redo the selection process, and is told that the goblet is now extinguished and will not light again until it's time for the next contest. > > Pippin: > > > In Harry's case, there was no way to let the Goblet know it had > > been defrauded, and therefore presumably no way to keep it > > from enforcing the penalties on Harry. Possibly they could have > > called off the whole contest -- but how could Dumbledore be > > sure that wasn't what the enemy wanted? > > Magpie: > I'd think that even if the enemy did want that it would be a better thing to do than risking Harry's life, but everyone seems to be under the impression that Harry is, indeed, in the tournament because someone wants to kill him (though oddly people don't think of Voldemort being behind it as much as they should). Ironically, I'm sure late in the year Rita Skeeter writes some article that seems to suggest Harry could get out of the tournament somehow, though I don't remember it now. > > Of course, I also can't help but think how I would have gotten out of it if I were in it. Surely Harry could go through the motions without actually risking anything. Pippin: I don't remember Rita Skeeter suggesting that Harry could withdraw. Dumbledore could hardly annouce that his purpose in hosting the tournament was to protect Karkaroff from a resurgent Voldemort because Karkaroff had taken the rap for betraying DE's who had actually been outed by Snape, but that is certainly a possibility. Your plan is not a bad one, but Harry would never have cooperated with it. He'd rather die a thousand deaths -- or leave Hogwarts-- than be made to look like a coward in front of the whole school. With Voldie on his way back Harry'd be at less risk competing openly than leaving school or sneaking behind DD's back to compete as he did to save the Stone. > Pippin: > Dumbledore's fairness (and I do believe > > he thought it was only fair to credit Harry in the spirit of the > > rules) actually worked against his interest, assuming he > > was more interested in keeping Harry alive than in having > > him win a contest he didn't want him to have entered in the > > first place. > > Magpie: > But that still goes to a_svirn's point, which is not that Harry is a big cheater himself. It's that Dumbledore gets to meddle in things when he thinks they need evening up but at other times--times when things are a lot more blatantly irregular--he doesn't do anything. For instance, his school having an extra champion is far more unfair and not in the spirit of the rules than Harry getting fewer points because he took the most time to come out of the lake. I don't even think the latter is not in the spirit of the rules any more than it would be in the spirit of the rules of basketball to say that someone should get points for scoring a basket after the buzzer because they stopped to help someone up who had fallen on their way to the basket. Pippin; The rules seem to be that scoring is totally within the judges' discretion, just like the scoring for the House Cup. I don't recall anything in the rules that says they can't award extra points for moral fibre. Does anyone think that if it had been Krum or Fleur who stayed to make sure the other hostages were safe, Dumbledore wouldn't have wanted extra points awarded to them? Anyway, no one has addressed my point that as far as Dumbledore knew, all Harry would get out of being awarded extra points is more exposure to the dangers of the maze. Pippin From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat May 6 20:39:44 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 20:39:44 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151928 > >>Magpie: > > But that still goes to a_svirn's point, which is not that Harry > > is a big cheater himself. It's that Dumbledore gets to meddle > > in things when he thinks they need evening up but at other times- > > -times when things are a lot more blatantly irregular--he > > doesn't do anything. > > For instance, his school having an extra champion is far more > > unfair and not in the spirit of the rules than Harry getting > > fewer points because he took the most time to come out of the > > lake. I don't even think the latter is not in the spirit of the > > rules any more than it would be in the spirit of the rules of > > basketball to say that someone should get points for scoring a > > basket after the buzzer because they stopped to help someone up > > who had fallen on their way to the basket. > >>Pippin; > The rules seem to be that scoring is totally within the judges' > discretion, just like the scoring for the House Cup. I don't > recall anything in the rules that says they can't award extra > points for moral fibre. > Does anyone think that if it had been Krum or Fleur who stayed to > make sure the other hostages were safe, Dumbledore wouldn't have > wanted extra points awarded to them? Betsy Hp: Oh, he proabably would have. And it would have been just as bad, IMO. In the end, the three competitions were fairly straight forward. They were races. Get the egg from the dragon first. Get your hostage from the lake first. Get to the cup in the middle of the maze first. Yes, there could be a bit of judging on *how* someone got their egg. Krum looses points for causing his dragon to injure her eggs. I think Cedric lost some points because of his injury. But in the end, getting the egg was the key. In the second task there was a time limit, and Harry blew it. He didn't surface with his hostage until the time was up. Yes, Harry showed moral fiber (or panicky idiocy, depending on your point of view ), and sure, maybe a special mention would have been good. But the extra points that pushed him into second place were bad sport, to my mind. The judges suddenly turned the whole game on its head in order to give the game to Harry. And that, in turn, lessened the sacrifice Harry made. Actually, the corruption on display in the Triwizard Tournament could easily be seen as an echo of the corruption in the WW. Especially in the way it helps Voldemort achieve his goals. The interesting thing is it shows that Dumbledore is as entangled in the corruption of his world as Lucius Malfoy or Arthur Weasley. Even when he fights against it (the age line, for example, or his refusal to help his Champions cheat) he gets pulled in. Hmm, perhaps this is what the bad sportsmanship is all about? The attempt to entangle Harry in the corruption as well? Which raises the question: is Harry getting sucked in, or is he resisting the pull? > >>Pippin: > Anyway, no one has addressed my point that as far as Dumbledore > knew, all Harry would get out of being awarded extra points is > more exposure to the dangers of the maze. Betsy Hp: How does that follow? If Harry had lost the second task (as he should have) he still would have entered the maze. Are you saying Fleur had an easier time of it because she was the last to enter? No, I don't think Dumbledore (and the other judges) either increased Harry's danger or lessened it. What they *did* do was increase Harry's personal glory. Something Harry neither sought after (at that time, anyway) nor needed. Betsy Hp From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat May 6 21:55:45 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 21:55:45 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151929 > >>Peg: > > Just guessing, of course, but maybe the level of Ginny's anger > > has to do with the fact that Harry is with Ron? > > > >>SSSusan: > > I totally agree with Peg that this is likely one of the things > > going on for Ginny. But I think the other thing which might > > explain the degree of her anger is the fact that she's sick to > > death of her brothers watching over her, commenting on whom > > she's dating, criticizing her for hopping from boy to boy, and > > generally (in her mind) interfering and treating her like a baby. > Ceridwen: > I recall becoming over the top as a teenager just because I was > embarrassed. Being caught in a clinch by an older brother who has > been harping on just that thing would certainly do it; getting > caught by that older brother in front of current and hoped-for > boyfriends both would send me in, fists flying, I'm sure. > Betsy Hp: Hmm, I can see embarrassment being the driving force here. Though it was stupid to make out in a corridor rather than a more secluded nook. Not that I think Ginny is this Machiavellian genius, purposefully making out in a corridor so that Harry catches her being "sexy" (which would mean she insulted Ron on purpose in the hopes that he'd lag behind in a fit of depression) tempting as that scenario might be. But yeah, even if Ginny unconsiously hoped to get caught by Harry, it'd still be embarrassing having Ron call her on her behavior. Which would drive the anger. But would she be *that* angry? Ginny drew her wand, which is the equivelent of "fists flying" for young witches. And then she dragged out Ron's more embarrassing secrets. And then she nearly cried (which more than anything else points to a massive amount of anger, IMO). I could buy the "sick and tired of intruding brothers" that you've all brought up (and Ginger so beautifully backed with canon) if there'd been a bit more of it once everyone was at school. Because it's been a couple of months, and while I *can* see Ron making comments throughout the summer (especially with the enforced togetherness a summer at the Burrow ensures) we don't see any evidence of Ron continuing the "big brother" role while at school. Not that I can recall anyway. Not until his baby sister decides to make out in front him. (Can you tell I'm coming at this from the big sister's POV? ) Plus, Ginny seemed to be nursing an angry streak before this scene even happened. She snapped at Ron, overstepping all sorts of bounds, in the practice right before this. Basically, Ginny's been angry since the book begins. This scene is more Ginny hitting a much built up boiling point than anything else. (And it doesn't cancel her anger either. She's still angry when the match against Slytherin occurs.) So while I think embarrassment and annoyance at interfering brothers drives some of her anger, to my mind there's something else going on. Maybe the "not the baby anymore" stuff. Or even the "*when* will Harry finally notice me?" stuff. (With a bit of the Bill just *cannot* get married on the side.) > >>Angie: > > She was also angry b/c Ron embarrassed her, but more importantly, > himself, at Quidditch practice. I believe she feels Ron is not > living up to his potential on the Quidditch field and she wants him > to realize his potential. Maybe constructive criticism or > encouragement would be more productive, but Ginny doesn't strike me > as a warm-fuzzy person. > Betsy Hp: See I *did* see Ginny as a bit more warm and fuzzy. Her interactions with Harry in OotP seemed to point in that direction, her ability to calm and even soothe him when no else could. And we see more of that in HBP, like at the end where only Ginny is able to lead Harry away from Dumbledore's corpse. And even with Ron, Ginny had been more warm and fuzzy before. Her care of Ron when he totally humiliated himself in GoF by asking Fluer to the Yule Ball struck me as warm. But now, when Ron is obviously suffering, she attacks him in a manner that not only doesn't help, but actually makes his playing worse. It's contradictory, IMO. And speaks to either bad writing on JKR's part, or something going on with Ginny that will clear itself up in book 7. However, Ginny is *consistently* angry at this point. She's angry and cruel to Ron during practice. She's angry and cruel to Ron in the corridor. And then she's angry and cruel towards Zacharias at the Quidditch match. As Angie pointed out in the part I snipped, she was angry and cruel towards Zacharias on the train to Hogwarts. Heck, she was even angry and cruel towards Fluer back at the Burrow (with a side of angry and cruel to Ron at the same time). Which points away from JKR being a bad writer and towards something being up with Ginny. > >>Ceridwen: > > And, she's fifth year. Isn't that when CAPSLOCK!Harry appeared? > This could also be the beginnings of Ginny breaking away from > parents and such and growing into an adult. > She did not seem OTT to me, considering. > > >>Peg: > > I'm not a big fan of "spunky" Ginny and I mostly agree with your > (ruthlessly snipped) comments about her rage, but I don't > necessarily take JKR's interview as proof that there's not > something deeper going on with Ginny. Teenaged girls take > EVERYTHING personally and to heart, so I don't see her anger as > out-of-character for any adolescent girl. They haven't figured > out how to control themselves yet, and the whole hormone thing > needs to be taken into account. Hopefully Ginny will grow up and > calm down quite a bit in book 7. Betsy Hp: Hopefully! Actually, now I wonder if Ginny doesn't calm down once she and Harry start dating. It only occurs towards the end of HBP, and I don't think Ginny goes into any rampages after they get together. If Ginny has been carrying a torch for Harry this whole time, that would necessarily put her under some stress (with the added growing pains every teenager goes through). And yes, I *should* ignore JKR's interviews, shouldn't I? It's the paragon problem again. JKR claimed Ginny as "Harry's perfect girlfriend" which pushes her into paragon land, and no character worth their salt should ever be in paragon land. Far too boring. (Though I would like some acknowledgment within the book that angry! Ginny behaves badly. I don't like the suggestion that throwing hexes and humiliating people is good behavior, no matter the stress she might be under. Even capslocks!Harry is called on his behavior in OotP - by Ron no less.) Betsy Hp From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 6 22:08:47 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 22:08:47 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151930 > Betsy Hp: > Hopefully! Actually, now I wonder if Ginny doesn't calm down once > she and Harry start dating. It only occurs towards the end of HBP, > and I don't think Ginny goes into any rampages after they get > together. If Ginny has been carrying a torch for Harry this whole > time, that would necessarily put her under some stress (with the > added growing pains every teenager goes through). > Potioncat: You know what is super cool about this idea? Merope pines away because of love. Tonks becomes a shadow of her former self and loses powers. Ginny just gets mad and Merlin help anyone who gets in her way. I like it. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat May 6 22:22:06 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 22:22:06 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151931 Betsy Hp: > Hopefully! Actually, now I wonder if Ginny doesn't calm down once > she and Harry start dating. It only occurs towards the end of HBP, > and I don't think Ginny goes into any rampages after they get > together. If Ginny has been carrying a torch for Harry this whole > time, that would necessarily put her under some stress (with the > added growing pains every teenager goes through). Ceridwen: Yes, stress. If I recall right, I'm in the minority on the board in thinking that Hermione's advice, to be herself and have fun, forget about Harry, all of that, however it was worded, wasn't very good after all. How can Ginny be herself if she's dating other people when she would rather be with Harry? That would mean she's using some nice, or not so nice, guys to pretend not to be interested in Harry. Not nice, and it will affect her personality, in my opinion. Ceridwen. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 6 22:54:17 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 22:54:17 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151932 > > Betsy Hp: > Oh, he proabably would have. And it would have been just as bad, > IMO. In the end, the three competitions were fairly straight > forward. They were races. Get the egg from the dragon first. Get > your hostage from the lake first. Get to the cup in the middle of > the maze first. > > Yes, there could be a bit of judging on *how* someone got their > egg. Krum looses points for causing his dragon to injure her eggs. > I think Cedric lost some points because of his injury. But in the > end, getting the egg was the key > > In the second task there was a time limit, and Harry blew it. He > didn't surface with his hostage until the time was up. Yes, Harry > showed moral fiber (or panicky idiocy, depending on your point of > view ), and sure, maybe a special mention would have been good. > But the extra points that pushed him into second place were bad > sport, to my mind. The judges suddenly turned the whole game on its > head in order to give the game to Harry. And that, in turn, lessened > the sacrifice Harry made. Pippin: You're assuming that the goal was simply to accomplish the task within the timelimit and so that should be the basis of the scoring. But according to Dumbledore the tasks were meant to test the champions in many different ways "their magical prowess--their daring--their powers of deduction--and, of course, their ability to cope with danger." Notice that "daring" and "ability to cope with danger" are two different categories. Ability to cope with danger is more than sheer bravery. Harry should lose points for failing to deduce that his fear that the hostages would be left in the hands of the merpeople forever was groundless. But his ability to cope with danger was also being tested -- and showing moral fiber in the face of danger is a big part of what Dumbledore (and Rowling) think being a wizard, or shall we say, an empowered adult, is all about. > > > >>Pippin: > > Anyway, no one has addressed my point that as far as Dumbledore > > knew, all Harry would get out of being awarded extra points is > > more exposure to the dangers of the maze. > > Betsy Hp: > How does that follow? If Harry had lost the second task (as he > should have) he still would have entered the maze. Are you saying > Fleur had an easier time of it because she was the last to enter? Pippin: If all had gone as expected, presumably all the contestants would have been permitted to leave the maze as soon as someone had achieved the cup. We don't know how far apart the contestants were spaced, but supposing it was every fifteen minutes, the fourth place contestant would have spent a full hour less in a maze full of known wizard-killers than the first place contestant. I should think that would weigh more on Dumbledore's mind than a chance for Harry to win glory which he hardly needs. Pippin From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat May 6 23:06:52 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 23:06:52 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151933 > a_svirn: > Well, you got it all wrong. I never said a word against Harry. It is > the way the tournament is organized that raises my hackles. If > anyone's integrity is in question it's Dumbledore's, not Harry's. Geoff: Well, if I "got it all wrong", it was possibly because the tournament was raising your hackles and you didn't make your points particularly clear. a_svirn: In a Message 151721 (Mon 1 2006) I stated: "Here is a broad and general meaning from a dictionary: "sportsmanship 1. conduct considered fitting for a sportsperson, including *observance of the rules of fair play* (emphasis mine ? a_svirn), respect for others, and graciousness in losing". While it can easily be applied for the champions themselves, the jury and the members of the organizing committee don't seem to know the first thing about fair play". I should think it's clear enough. Maybe you confused me with someone else. (Although I can't think who it could have been. I've yet to see a post stating that Harry is an unscrupulous double dealer.) Pippin: But do the judges have power over the magical contract or is it in the sole discretion of the goblet? It appears they do not. a_svirn: Which calls for the question ? why on earth the judges use magical contracts at all, if they don't have power over them? Pippin: That's why everyone keeps saying that the goblet is impartial ? supposedly none of the judges can influence it. a_svirn: I fail to see what the impartiality of the Goblet has to do with magical contracts, though. Surely Dumbledore could charm the Goblet, so that magical binding did not follow the selection itself. And if he couldn't, why use the Goblet at all? It is easily duped, as we have seen, and what's more there is not a shred of fairness in these one-sided magical contracts, even without this extra champion debacle. Pippin: The rules seem to be that scoring is totally within the judges' discretion, just like the scoring for the House Cup. a_svirn: If you can call that rules Besides, your simile is not particularly accurate. In the House Cup points are being awarded for pretty much everything, whereas in the tournament the participants had concrete tasks to accomplish. It follows, therefore, that points should have been awarded for the accomplishment of these tasks. Pippin: Anyway, no one has addressed my point that as far as Dumbledore knew, all Harry would get out of being awarded extra points is more exposure to the dangers of the maze. a_svirn: But he would have been exposed to them in any case. Extra points gave him (quite unfairly) advantage over Krum, but even if he had been the last one to enter the maze he would have had the same dangers to face. Pat: How do we know that anyone, if caught, goes unpunished? I have no recollection of anything from canon that discusses this. a_svirn: Because they cannot be disqualified ? these magical contracts see to it. The worst that can be done is (presumably) the subtraction of points. And that's no big deal ? because judges can cheat by awarding points unfairly (like Karkaroff) and without fear of reprisal. And even if you get 0 points you are allowed to enter the maze. Indeed, that's an honour you cannot refuse. Pat: At any rate, where I'm going with this is to dispute your statement that cheating is incorporated in the rules. Everybody *is not* doing it - none of the Hogwarts staff is involved, except the afore-mentioned Crouch!Moody, who had his own agenda there, too (he wasn't interested in Harry winning for a good purpose, but to serve his master.) a_svirn: And who is Professor Hagrid ? a next-door neighbor? Also Crouch Jr., whatever his agenda, *is* a member of the staff and no one seems to think his behavior fishy. Harry gratefully accepts his help and swallows the explanation about traditional cheating without a second thought. And no wonder ? nothing he had seen so far could dissuade him from it. So, presumably, did Cedric and Hagrid. Charley Weasley is not exactly a member of the staff but he's a member of the team nonetheless. And yet he turns a blind eye on Hagrid's cheating. If he seems a trifle exasperated, it is because Hagrid helps a rival team. One of the judges ? Bagman ? also cheats or at the very least tries to. Moreover, he is heavily involved in betting, and not particularly discreet about it. Dumbledore awards points on a dubious pretext. Karkaroff awards points blatantly unfairly. The only ones who were directly involved and did not cheat were Crouch Sr. and Percy (well, Dumbledore undecided). And considering that Crouch Sr. and Percy never attended simultaneously it means that out of the five judges only one was unscrupulously and unquestionably fair (And to think that it was "the world's biggest prat".) But it's not just these instances that make me say that cheating is incorporated into the rules. The very fact that Harry Potter the underage second Hogwarts' Champion is quite officially foisted onto the other champions and nothing can be done about it means that rules aren't working and cheating is the order of the day. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat May 6 23:17:20 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 23:17:20 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151934 > Pippin: > You're assuming that the goal was simply to accomplish the task > within the timelimit and so that should be the basis of the scoring. > But according to Dumbledore the tasks were > meant to test the champions in many different ways "their magical > prowess--their daring--their powers of deduction--and, of course, > their ability to cope with danger." > > Notice that "daring" and "ability to cope with danger" are two > different categories. Ability to cope with danger is more than > sheer bravery. > > Harry should lose points for failing to deduce that his fear that > the hostages would be left in the hands of the merpeople forever > was groundless. But his ability to cope with danger was also being > tested -- and showing moral fiber in the face of danger is a big > part of what Dumbledore (and Rowling) think being a wizard, or > shall we say, an empowered adult, is all about. > a_svirn: Huh. That's stretching the point until it squeaks. Besides shouldn't then Dumbledore have subtracted points for Harry's powers of deduction from the points he awarded for his "coping with danger"? From belviso at attglobal.net Sun May 7 00:45:06 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 20:45:06 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) References: Message-ID: <014201c6716f$80cf0fc0$138c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151935 > Betsy Hp: > See I *did* see Ginny as a bit more warm and fuzzy. Her > interactions with Harry in OotP seemed to point in that direction, > her ability to calm and even soothe him when no else could. And we > see more of that in HBP, like at the end where only Ginny is able to > lead Harry away from Dumbledore's corpse. > > And even with Ron, Ginny had been more warm and fuzzy before. Her > care of Ron when he totally humiliated himself in GoF by asking > Fluer to the Yule Ball struck me as warm. But now, when Ron is > obviously suffering, she attacks him in a manner that not only > doesn't help, but actually makes his playing worse. It's > contradictory, IMO. And speaks to either bad writing on JKR's part, > or something going on with Ginny that will clear itself up in book 7. > > However, Ginny is *consistently* angry at this point. She's angry > and cruel to Ron during practice. She's angry and cruel to Ron in > the corridor. And then she's angry and cruel towards Zacharias at > the Quidditch match. As Angie pointed out in the part I snipped, she > was angry and cruel towards Zacharias on the train to Hogwarts. > Heck, she was even angry and cruel towards Fluer back at the Burrow > (with a side of angry and cruel to Ron at the same time). Which > points away from JKR being a bad writer and towards something being > up with Ginny. Magpie: I honestly think a lot of what we're seeing here is just the author trying to make this character stand out in a way she thinks is positive. Ginny's "real" personality is revealed in OotP when she enters the book establishing herself as no longer ordinary and a little shy, but aggressive, cool and fun (so anything from books 1-4 goes up in smoke). She's not treated as a little sister in many ways in this new incarnation; the twins respect her in ways they don't respect Ron. That's when it becomes clear Ginny is supposed to be the ideal girl (and so the ideal girl for Harry). She gets funny one-liners that make everyone laugh, puts people in their place easily. She's not dating Michael Corner in secret--Ron just doesn't happen to know and is surprised because he's a bit virginal, but Ginny's always cool (as in the opposite of being a loser) with Michael (dumping him for being a sore loser, saying he can go comfort Cho, I think she once goes over to stop him "being an idiot"). In HBP her idealness steps up a notch and I think that's just what we're seeing is the author's coolest girl ever. She has a fiery temper. She stands up for herself, especially when the issue has a feminist angle. Basically, I think it's just a good way to showcase Ginny and make her flash. Put-downs are some of the most easily recognized jokes you can do, so given that Ginny's got limited time they make her stand out. (I admit I think the jokes sometimes gets downright clunky like when Ron's feeding lines so Ginny can deliver a joke about the tattoo.) Since her baseline is tripping Ron, calling Fleur Phlegm and dismissing Michael Corner I think she just gets a bit shrill when it's stepped up a notch when she or Harry's been slighted. And I think many times we're just supposed to think it's funny and honestly not think it's cruel. I was completely sideswiped by the attitude towards Zach, for instance. -m From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sun May 7 01:12:51 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 01:12:51 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151936 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > The higher self transformed from the base metal of LV(selfish) to the gold of Love. We each have the potential to be either LV or DD. Harry representing Everyman has the choice minute by minute to more toward one pole or the other. Perhaps the reason that Tom and Harry look so much alike is to show this point. It is our choices that determine what we become. We can become LV or DD. Hence, Harry is DD's man to the end. Steven1965aaa: I think this is a very good point. But here's the 64,000 question - in the end, how will that help Harry win, i.e. vanquish LV? From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sun May 7 01:09:10 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 01:09:10 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151937 Peg: > > > Just guessing, of course, but maybe the level of Ginny's anger > > > has to do with the fact that Harry is with Ron? Steven1965aaa: Note that when she really gets angry in that scene she says something like "Hermione snogged Krum! Harry snogged Cho!" IMR the book says something like "she was almost sobbing now", when she said that. That's when she sounded the most emptional. IMO her words/actions/emotions here have a lot to do with her feelings towards Harry. Remember also that she's a 5th year. Going through the type of emotional turmoil that Harry had in his 5th year in OOP? From somedayalive at yahoo.com Sun May 7 01:26:01 2006 From: somedayalive at yahoo.com (Jennifer Carlson) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 01:26:01 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry and Harry a Horocrux ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151938 > Steven1965aaa: > > I think this is a very good point. But here's the 64,000 question - in > the end, how will that help Harry win, i.e. vanquish LV? Jen: Going at this from a more personal angle to give explanation! I have Borderline Personality Disorder...without treatment, I could *easily* be LV...WITH treatment I am a loving mother, wife, friend, and capable of doing great and lovely things! *All* people have a light and dark side. I think for JKs purposes, it made more sense to split them, in order to show those traits to their fullest through LV and Harry... However, to answer this particular question...you cannot overcome darkness without understanding it...thus the common phrase about facing your fears. For example...if I had not *sought* to understand my own illness, it WOULD control me b/c I would be completely ignorant about it. This is why DD makes such a HUGE effort to help Harry understand LV...he has to be able to *understand* his foe to have any hope to *conquer* him. Jen, who hopes that makes sense as she's got a wicked migraine! From estesrandy at yahoo.com Sun May 7 02:45:36 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 02:45:36 -0000 Subject: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151939 If you want to learn more about Heroes in classical and medieval tradition look at http://www.fellowshipofreason.com/archives/4heroes.htm The things that stand out in the summary are quite interesting.. "The classical hero, he is of royal birth or even... half mortal and half god." A Half blood Prince seems to fit the bill. "He must perform extraordinary feats" like fooling the Dark Lord. "He has a fatal flaw" I think Snape is flawed. "The suffering of the character is physical" Snape has obviously suffered and will suffer more in Book 7. "Death must occur in an unusual way" I predict that Snape dies in Book 7. "The hero fights for his own honor, his deeds belong to the community only after his death." Snape will somehow save the day or die trying. Harry represents the Medieval Hero. He was born a commoner. (Or at least raised as one.) He remains loyal to his master, Dumbledore. He has learned humility, obedience (loyalty), generosity, willingness to act, acceptance, restraint, temperance, and sacrifice. He will wage war with Voldemort on behalf of his Lord's (Dumbledore's) principals. Harry may die, but I do believe he will learn about the heroic deeds of Snape before the end of the series. By the way, did anyone notice my fun with words? Humility Obedience Generosity Willingness Acceptance of his duties Restraint Temperance Sacrifice Randy From somedayalive at yahoo.com Sun May 7 01:32:50 2006 From: somedayalive at yahoo.com (Jennifer Carlson) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 01:32:50 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151940 Betsy HP: What they *did* do was increase > Harry's personal glory. > Jen: You know, as a mother myself I can quite honestly say that rewarding my child for showing such strength of character would be FAR more important to me than rewarding him for following the rules at the risk of discarding any sense of humanitarianism and care for other human beings...why should that be ANY different in this situation? From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun May 7 03:57:02 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 03:57:02 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: <014201c6716f$80cf0fc0$138c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151941 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > However, Ginny is *consistently* angry at this point. She's > > angry and cruel to Ron during practice. She's angry and cruel > > to Ron in the corridor. And then she's angry and cruel towards > > Zacharias at the Quidditch match. As Angie pointed out in the > > part I snipped, she was angry and cruel towards Zacharias on the > > train to Hogwarts. Heck, she was even angry and cruel towards > > Fluer back at the Burrow (with a side of angry and cruel to Ron > > at the same time). Which points away from JKR being a bad > > writer and towards something being up with Ginny. > >>Magpie: > I honestly think a lot of what we're seeing here is just the > author trying to make this character stand out in a way she thinks > is positive. Ginny's "real" personality is revealed in OotP when > she enters the book establishing herself as no longer ordinary and > a little shy, but aggressive, cool and fun (so anything from books > 1-4 goes up in smoke). She's not treated as a little sister in > many ways in this new incarnation; the twins respect her in ways > they don't respect Ron. > That's when it becomes clear Ginny is supposed to be the ideal > girl (and so the ideal girl for Harry). > Betsy Hp: Oh, I absolutely *hate* how Ginny treats Ron. It's exactly how the twins treat Percy, and it's totally and completely wrong. The disrespect is absolutely terrible, and it drives me up the wall. And why Percy and Ron don't come down on their younger siblings like a ton of bricks I really don't know. (They're much more accepting of that sort of behavior than I'd have ever been. Of course, I didn't have to deal with the boy versus girl dynamic, so that might be tying Ron's hands, I don't know.) I wonder though, is super-cool!Ginny the real girl? We do have that moment at the end of HBP where Ginny confesses that she's *always* been in love with Harry. So, even while dating Michael and Dean, she's been carrying a torch for Harry. Which would mean that if she did follow Hermione's advice she is playing at a detachment that doesn't actually exist. > >>Ceridwen: > > If I recall right, I'm in the minority on the board in thinking > that Hermione's advice, to be herself and have fun, forget > about Harry, all of that, however it was worded, wasn't very good > after all. How can Ginny be herself if she's dating other people > when she would rather be with Harry? That would mean she's using > some nice, or not so nice, guys to pretend not to be interested in > Harry. Not nice, and it will affect her personality, in my > opinion. Betsy Hp: I agree with Ceridwen here. While Hermione worded it as Ginny being more herself, she's actually suggesting Ginny *not* be herself. And Ginny does go out and practice her quidditch (which *had* to have occured in the middle of the night -- no other logistic works for a place like the Burrow) so she can join the team too. So Ginny is putting *a lot* of work into being the sort of girl she knows Harry is interested in. > >>Magpie: > She gets funny one-liners that make everyone laugh, puts people in > their place easily. She's not dating Michael Corner in secret-- > Ron just doesn't happen to know and is surprised because he's a > bit virginal, but Ginny's always cool (as in the opposite of being > a loser) with Michael (dumping him for being a sore loser, saying > he can go comfort Cho, I think she once goes over to stop > him "being an idiot"). Betsy Hp: But could Ginny's casualness with Michael be more about her lack of interest? After all, she's still in love with Harry while she's dating Michael, so she's going to be more critical than a girl in love should be. She's not emotionally involved with Michael, so he can annoy her more easily. In a sense, Ginny is in the more powerful position because obviously Michael approached *her*. He's the one with the emotional involvement. And it's the same thing with Dean. Dean must have approached Ginny and again, she's in the more powerful position. The thing is, Dean is a pretty easy going, laid back kind of guy. It must have been hard for Ginny to find a reason to break up with him. Which is why she grabbed onto the "too nice" excuse. > >>Magpie: > In HBP her idealness steps up a notch and I think that's just what > we're seeing is the author's coolest girl ever. She has a fiery > temper. She stands up for herself, especially when the issue has > a feminist angle. > Betsy Hp: But, if you'd never read a single interview and had to base your judgement of Ginny soley on what you've read in the books, doesn't it seem that she's not fiery, she's out and out angry? I mean, she nearly *cries* in the hallway scene. That's anger. Major, major anger. I'm just wondering if Ginny has been placed on too high a pedestal by JKR's declaration that she's "Harry's perfect girl". When really, we should pay just as much attention to that judgement call as we should have paid to the "Draco's bad news" or "Hagrid is wonderful" or "Dumbledore's the epitome of goodness" declarations JKR made over the years, that the books haven't born out. Actually, there's been suggestions made that JKR answers interview questions based on where Harry is in the books. And at this point in time Harry is quite certain that Ginny is just wonderful, since he's full of the flush of first love. But JKR usually does such a good job of writing her characters full of flaws. Perhaps Ginny's temper isn't meant to be a good thing. It does screw Ron's playing up something terrible, with all the fall-out that brought about. > >>Betsy Hp: > Hopefully! Actually, now I wonder if Ginny doesn't calm down once > she and Harry start dating. It only occurs towards the end of HBP, > and I don't think Ginny goes into any rampages after they get > together. If Ginny has been carrying a torch for Harry this whole > time, that would necessarily put her under some stress (with the > added growing pains every teenager goes through). > >>Potioncat: > You know what is super cool about this idea? Merope pines away > because of love. Tonks becomes a shadow of her former self and > loses powers. Ginny just gets mad and Merlin help anyone who gets > in her way. I like it. Betsy Hp: The interesting thing is, HBP is all about bad love, isn't it? Tonks is weakened, not strengthened, by love (ditto with Lupin, actually). Merope becomes her father and abuses a muggle in a horrible way, destroying Tom and herself in the process. Draco is held captive by his love for his parents. Bill and Fluer's love cause havoc in the Weasley family. Ron and Hermione are horrible to each other because of their love. And yeah, Ginny weakens her quidditch team and may have even made collecting or destroying a horcrux that much harder (if Zacharias is connected to the Hufflepuff cup). Things start to turn around at the end of HBP, and we get some hints things have improved. But I wonder if this last book will show us good love? Where the love strengthens and improves those involved. Just a thought. Betsy Hp From celizwh at intergate.com Sun May 7 04:25:30 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 04:25:30 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151942 Betsy Hp: > Actually, the corruption on display in the Triwizard Tournament > could easily be seen as an echo of the corruption in the WW. > Especially in the way it helps Voldemort achieve his goals. The > interesting thing is it shows that Dumbledore is as entangled in the > corruption of his world as Lucius Malfoy or Arthur Weasley. Even > when he fights against it (the age line, for example, or his refusal > to help his Champions cheat) he gets pulled in. > > Hmm, perhaps this is what the bad sportsmanship is all about? The > attempt to entangle Harry in the corruption as well? Which raises > the question: is Harry getting sucked in, or is he resisting the > pull? houyhnhnm: This is the conclusion I have been coming to as I have followed this thread. I have been flipping back through some of the earlier books (at random, not any systematic way) and I have been struck several times by Harry's fundamental decency in his early confrontations with the Wizarding World, a deliverance which at first appears to be so felicitous but is already turning sour by CoS. The example which comes to mind immediately is the the way Harry's first thought, after being brought to task for helping to fly the Ford Anglia to Hogwarts, is not for himself, but for the trouble he may have gotten Mr. Weasley into. There are many other examples up to and including his determination to let Cedric in on the inside information about the dragons to which he has been privy. It is not Harry who shows unsportsman-like proclivities, but the world of which he has become a part. I have been wondering whether or not the corruption in the WW is somehow connected with the moral fragmentation in that world as evidenced by the House divisions at Hogwarts. Just as ambition is apportioned solely to Slytherin (and is allowed to be expressed in a debased rather than a virtuous way), so the concept of fair play is allotted solely to Hufflepuff, rather than being integrated into Wizard culture as a whole. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 7 04:35:13 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 04:35:13 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151943 > Betsy HP: > What they *did* do was increase > > Harry's personal glory. > > > > > Jen: > You know, as a mother myself I can quite honestly say that rewarding > my child for showing such strength of character would be FAR more > important to me than rewarding him for following the rules at the risk > of discarding any sense of humanitarianism and care for other human > beings...why should that be ANY different in this situation? > Alla: I agree with you, Jen. I read this as a message that saving lifes ( even if the danger was only perceived) is more important than caring about winning by all means. Rewards of course do not always follow good deeds in RL, if ever. But IMO she is saying here that such good deeds SHOULD be rewarded and at least in Potterverse she has a freedom to sometimes reward the characters for the good deeds they do ( and I do agree with the argument that we don't know precisely that points for moral fiber could not be awarded. For all I know they can and should be awarded to anybody who shows moral fiber and will be in perfect accordance to the rules of TWT for all I know. ) Dumbledore IMO does the similar thing in PS/SS. He awards the points to Neville for moral courage and JKR did say that she specifically wanted to make a point of how important moral courage is. Was Neville standing up to his friends stupid? Yes, I would definitely say so, since he was an additional obstacle on their quest to "save the stone from Snape" for all they knew. But for Neville they could have gotten there faster. Neville IMO did not help them one bit, he just deterred them for nothing, except for doing what he believed was right. I think Harry doing what he thought was right is by far more important than winning the competition. Neville IMO really really did not think that he would help Gryffindor win House Cup, when he tried to stop the Trio. Does it mean that he should not have gotten the points? I think it was a just reward and as long as Neville back there and Harry here did not expect to be rewarded, I have absolutely no problem with it. And here is the example from RW that sometimes saving the lifes of your competitors even at the expense of strictly following the rules gets noticed. Such example is the Pierre de Coubertein medal for true sportsmanship that gets awarded on the Olimpics. Here is the brief story from Wikipedia about one recipient of this medal. For some reason his actions remind me of what Harry did, even if in Harry's situation the danger was only perceived. "Lawrence Lemieux (born on November 12, 1955 in Edmonton, Alberta) is a Canadian sailor, who competed at the 1988 Summer Olympics in the Finn class. Lemieux was on course to win a silver medal when he noticed Joseph Chan and Shaw Her Siew of Singapore who had fallen out of his boat and was injured. Chan was struggling to stay afloat amid the currents. Lemieux abandoned the race and saved his competitor. This action caused Lemieux to slip from second place. He finished the event in 22nd place. At the closing ceremonies, IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranch awarded Lemieux the Pierre de Coubertin Medal for Sportsmanship. Lemieux has since retired from sailing and is now a coach." Of course, nobody awarded him the second place in the race, which he abandoned, but he did not leave without recognition and that recognition IMO was rightfully his, just as Harry's points for moral fiber were IMO rightfully his. JMO, Alla, who knows that in this time of the day she has a tendency to babble, but posts anyways. From catlady at wicca.net Sun May 7 05:29:00 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 05:29:00 -0000 Subject: Lily's protection for Harry In-Reply-To: <20060502085858.36833.qmail@web38314.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151944 Cassy Ferris wrote in : << why it never happened before? LV killed so many families, surely some mother would stand in front of her child in effort to protect him/her? We can't assume that Lily's love was of some "higher quality," so it worked better. Or was it that LV gave Lily a choice wether to die or not? But why exactly did he do it, wasted his time trying to convince a defenseless woman to stand aside? >> The same interview http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview.shtml says: << 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. James was going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice, so he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, I think there are distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the caliber of Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher because she could have saved herself. Now any mother, any normal mother would have done what Lily did. So in that sense her courage too was of an animal quality but she was given time to choose. James wasn't. It's like an intruder entering your house, isn't it? You would instinctively rush them. But if in cold blood you were told, "Get out of the way," you know, what would you do? I mean, I don't think any mother would stand aside from their child. But does that answer it? She did very consciously lay down her life. She had a clear choice - ES: And James didn't. JKR: Did he clearly die to try and protect Harry specifically given a clear choice? No. It's a subtle distinction and there's slightly more to it than that but that's most of the answer. MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry? JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen. MA: So no one - Voldemort or anyone using Avada Kedavra - ever gave someone a choice and then they took that option [to die] - JKR: They may have been given a choice, but not in that particular way. >> I don't believe that Snape was ever in love with Lily and I don't want JKR to say he was, but LOLLILOPS (the name of 'Snape loved Lily', as acronym of 'Love of Lily Left Ire Polluting Our Poor Severus') would tidily tie up a lot of loose ends, such as: Why did Snape turn against LV? Why did LV offer Lily a chance to live? Why did Snape feel remorse when he found that it was the Potters who would be killed because he had passed along the Prophecy? When Snape learned that LV was planning to kill all three Potters, including Lily, he begged LV to spare Lily's life. In order to make such a plea without seeming totally soft-hearted. he asked for LV to give Lily to him as a gift. LV, pleased with Snape for something else, promised that he would do so if Lily didn't interfere with him killing her baby. Snape, knowing that Lily would never consent to such thing, decided to save her life by foiling LV's entire attack by warning Dumbledore about it. At that time, Dumbledore talked Snape into serving as his spy; also, Dumbledore warned the Potters and the Longbottoms that LV was after them, so they went into hiding. After a while, LV got close on the Potters' trail; Snape warned Dumbledore; Dumbledore warned James (& Lily?) and suggested the Fidelius Charm. Due to Potters choosing Pettigrew as Secret Keeper, this backfired. LV did make a token effort to save Lily to give her to Severus, but he sure didn't put much effort into it. (There was once a theory that there was a Prophecy that Lily's child would win the war for his father's side, so LV wanted to keep Lily alive to bear him a child. I say, if he had wanted her for himself, he would have used a Stunning Spell or Petrificus Totalus or Imperius on her instead of AK.) (A simpler theory, which doesn't explain why Snape turned, is that Pettigrew wanted Lily for himself and his real reason for betraying Potters to LV was he offered LV a deal: "I can help you kill James and Harry if you give me Lily as a reward.") Snape, sincerely believing that Black was the traitorous Secret Keeper, doubled his hatred of Potter and Black because, between them, they had killed Lily -- that is, had ruined his plan to save Lily. It is possible to cobble together an explanation of how Snape didn't know it was Pettigrew when the Death Eaters in Azkaban did. If Bellatrix was the only Death Eater who knew it was Pettigrew, her crazed screams in Azkaban would have spread the word there. If Pettigrew knew that she knew about him, he would have hidden from her immediately (as he did) and, by the time she was put in Azkaban (months later), he was comfortable enough as a pet rat not to bother re-appearing as himself. From catlady at wicca.net Sun May 7 05:33:54 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 05:33:54 -0000 Subject: Anima(l/gus) Portal /Lots of different comments on CHAPDISC / GoF /scapegoat Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151945 Pippin wrote in : << Lupin says that no Hogwarts students ever found out more about the grounds or the village than the Marauders did. (snip) Maybe they found a long lost pet door? >> Not lost to the pets. As Betsy Hp wrote in , << there are any number of beasties within the castle that like to get out for a bit of romp on their own. Crookshanks is one familiar we know of, but other cat familiars probably like to get out for a night-time hunt as well. >> Meri wrote in : << I want to know is why Gryffindor never had a reserve seeker, for all those times that Harry ended up in hospital. >> The only evidence that Gryffindor ever had a reserve anything before Harry became captain is a bit of Lee Jordan's commentary in PS/SS: "a neat pass to Alicia Spinnet, a good find of Oliver Wood's, last year only a reserve". It could be that PS/SS was the first year that Oliver was captain (he was a fifth year in PS/SS) and he personally didn't accept to have any reserves on the team, therefore either promoting or firing all the previous year's (and previous captain's) reserves. Not having any reserves is really stupid, but so is the kids do all their strategizing and practising without any coach but each other. Betsy Hp wrote in : << He's an amazing flyer, and it's all his, not a hand-me-down from Voldemort. >> Harry always felt that his flying and Quidditch ability was the only ability that was really his, so I always wanted him to find out that he had gotten it from LV along with Parselmouth, just to see his emotions about it. But that won't happen now that flying and Quidditch are no longer important to Harry. Carol wrote in : << As for other chapter titles that might be similarly misleading, how about "Snape Victorious," in which Snape seems to be achieving a long-cherished ambition but is in fact being publicly acknowledged as the latest appointee to a jinxed, or perhaps cursed, position that ultimately leads to disaster for him and for Hogwarts? >> I thought the title 'Snape Victorious' referred to Snape getting to enjoy a few minutes of verbally beating up on Harry without interference. Thus he was victorious over 'Tonks' who wanted to protect Harry. Elfundeb wrote in : << By the end of the chapter I was beginning to wonder if Felix Felicis is nothing more than a placebo. (snip) But I think Harry's ability to extract Slughorn's Horcrux memory could fit this theory just as well. >> But when Harry took FF, "Why he knew that going to Hagrid's was the right thing to do, he had no idea. It was as though the potion was illuminating a few steps of the path at a time. (snip) It was when he reached the bottom step that it occurred to him how very pleasant it would be to pass the vegetable patch on his walk to Hagrid's. It was not strictly on the way, but it seemed clear to Harry that this was a whim on which he should act, so he di-rected his feet immediately toward the vegetable patch," it gave him HUNCHES as well as CONFIDENCE. a_svirn wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/151910 : << Magical contracts in effect make hostages out of champions, completely at the mercy of the hosts and the jury and pretty much everyone else. The question is therefore WHY did Dumbledore feel it necessary to introduce them? To include one rule that renders all the other rules defunct? >> I don't think Dumbledore introduced the magical contract(s). I think use of the Goblet of Fire has involved magical contract(s) since it was invented hundreds of years ago. If Dumbledore could have prevented the person chosen by the Goblet from participating, it would have been more effective than an Age Line to announce that an underage person who was chosen by the Goblet wouldn't be allowed to participate and their school would be without a contestant. Tonks_op wrote in : << Does anyone know of any custom in any culture since the beginning of time in which one person who was tried for a crime could have someone die it his place? >> As a child, I read that that was done in Imperial China. The point was that people would agree to be put to death in exchange for a payment not given until they were dead, because they valued feeding their starving family more than their own life. From dossett at lds.net Sun May 7 05:44:46 2006 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 05:44:46 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151946 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > And that leads me to the final issue: Ginny's Rage. > > Ginny is angry throughout this chapter. And I can't find anything > that might have set it off. She's angry at the quidditch practice > (snapping at Ron for no reason). She's unreasonably furious in the > corridor. And her attack on Zacharius made no sense at all. > Zacharius had only made derisive comments about Ginny at the > beginning of the match. By the end Ginny had played well enough, > Zacharius couldn't say anything. *And* Ginny's team won (thanks in > part to some spectacular playing on Ginny's part). Why does she > feel the need to physically attack Zacharius at the end of the game? > Pat: Three letters: P M S ~Pat (sorry - couldn't nelp myself!) From juli17 at aol.com Sun May 7 07:25:25 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 03:25:25 EDT Subject: Another Snape thread Message-ID: <3e0.1c87238.318efae5@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151947 Carol wrote: < big snip of Carol's thought-provoking post> Ideas, anyone? What do you think Snape will be up to, mostly off page, in Book 7? Surely all those revelations about him in HBP don't lead to a dead end on the tower. Julie, jumping in a bit late: First of all, I'm certain Snape will go back to Voldemort. Assuming DDM!Snape (as I always do!), Dumbledore wouldn't have forced Snape to suffer the emotional pain of killing him (not to mention a possible torn soul) if there wasn't very substantial gain involved. On the Tower Snape set himself up as a DE, and that can be for only one reason-- so he can return with Voldemort's trust in him solidified and work to weaken Voldemort's power from the inside. As for whether Snape would be forced to participate in DE raids or killings, it might not be expected of him. True he can no longer spy, but he presumably did some things for Voldemort before he started "spying" at Hogwarts, such as brewing potions. I suspect Snape's apparent murder of Dumbledore will give him a certain status within Voldemort's ranks that will allow him more autonomy than your average DE. Add to that his natural talents at potions and healing, and Voldemort's renewed trust in him, it's entirely possible Snape will be assigned something to do with making potions, protecting Voldemort's horcruxes, etc. Really, any dunderhead DE can torture or kill, so waste Snape's talents on something so mundane? As for what Snape will be up to, which will almost certainly be off page for most of Book 7, I think he will find a way to feed the Order (and thus Harry) crucial information. The revelation in HBP that Tonks changed her patronus seemed to be there for no reason other than to inform us of that capability. Add also JKR's refusal to reveal Snape's patronus because it would give away too much, and I conclude that we will 1. see a changed patronus in Book 7, and 2. that it will be Snape's. I suspect it will be a phoenix or something similarly evocative of Dumbledore. I think Snape will use it to feed information to the Order, and that information will be accepted as coming from a reliably loyal source, even if the source is unknown or incorrectly identified (as Abelforth, for instance). (The bigger question pertaining to patronuses is whether they always reflect the TRUE nature or character of a wizard, which is a subject for a separate post.) It's also possible Snape will have a direct contact in the Order, someone who knows he remains loyal, and Abelforth does seem to be a strong contender. Hagrid is another contender. Also, I think Snape may find a way to wreak his own havoc in DE camp, perhaps by turning some of the newer recruits (like Draco) away from Voldemort, or through some other mischief. I suspect Voldemort will finally catch on very late in the game, after Snape has done damage by his own actions or by passing on information. That will mean death for Snape of course (even though I'd love it if he survived!), but not before Harry finds out the whole truth about Snape. Doddie also wrote: I think children often have great instincts on who to trust and the only child we have ever seen appear to trust Snape was Malfoy(and perhaps Crabbe and Goyle)...Ron, Hermione, Harry, Neville, the Twins, even Percy don't trust Snape. Most only trust Snape because DD trusts him. I'd hate to see Harry's trust radar to be so far off. Julie: Actually, I think the only ones who expressed distrust of Snape are Harry (repeatedly) and Ron. Hermione seemed to trust Snape, and even though Neville, the twins and Percy considered Snape a git as a teacher, none ever expressed a distrust in him. (Disliking Snape and distrusting him are two different things, I believe). Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun May 7 08:11:11 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 08:11:11 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151948 > Betsy Hp: > See I *did* see Ginny as a bit more warm and fuzzy. Her > interactions with Harry in OotP seemed to point in that direction, > her ability to calm and even soothe him when no else could. And we > see more of that in HBP, like at the end where only Ginny is able to > lead Harry away from Dumbledore's corpse. > > And even with Ron, Ginny had been more warm and fuzzy before. Her > care of Ron when he totally humiliated himself in GoF by asking > Fluer to the Yule Ball struck me as warm. But now, when Ron is > obviously suffering, she attacks him in a manner that not only > doesn't help, but actually makes his playing worse. It's > contradictory, IMO. And speaks to either bad writing on JKR's part, > or something going on with Ginny that will clear itself up in book 7. > > However, Ginny is *consistently* angry at this point. She's angry > and cruel to Ron during practice. She's angry and cruel to Ron in > the corridor. And then she's angry and cruel towards Zacharias at > the Quidditch match. As Angie pointed out in the part I snipped, she > was angry and cruel towards Zacharias on the train to Hogwarts. > Heck, she was even angry and cruel towards Fluer back at the Burrow > (with a side of angry and cruel to Ron at the same time). Which > points away from JKR being a bad writer and towards something being > up with Ginny. Ginger: I may have connected some dots here. Tell me what you think. At the beginning of the book, we are told the the dementors are breeding. At the beginning of this very chapter, (Potioncat pointed out) the mist was very strong. If we go back to PoA, the three who were most effected by the dementors were Harry, Neville and Ginny. Harry was effected because of the memory of his parents' murders. He has dealt with that by learning the patronus, and by his realization that he must continue to fight LV so that others will not suffer as they did -or as he has. Neville is effected because of his parents' suffering. He has now faced Bella and stood his ground. He has grown and matured and his bravery has been tested and proven even to his Gran (see the newspaper clipping in HBP ch. 3). The dementors effect Ginny due to her posession by the diary. (I admit that this is only a conclusion that I have drawn, but I think it is a likely one.) She has not at this point had the opportunity to face that personal demon. Harry has faced LV, Neville has faced Bella, but Ginny will never really get to face 16-yr-old Tom Riddle. The nearest she can come will be facing LV, but she is still being told she's too young. I think she is now the person most effected by dementors because she has had no catharsis (sp?) and has not been able to work out those feelings. Ginny has a fiery temper. As Steven1965aaa pointed out, she's at the same age as CAPSLOCK!Harry. I also liked Pat's PMS point :) She's outgrown the shy little girl she once was. You are right that she does have the caring side (comforting Ron before the YB etc). How often does she really *really* get mad at Harry? Twice that I recall. Once in OoP ch. 23 where she scolds him for not remembering that she was once posessed by LV and could ask her how it feels; and once in HBP ch. 9 when she is "alarmed and angry" at Harry because she has overheard that he is taking instructions from a book that someone has written in. Harry assures her that it's just a text that someone has written in the margins, but she is thinking of the Diary. So both times, her anger is piqued by referrences to her posession. The Horcrux issue is vital to HBP and will be vital to the Destruction of LV. DD becomes aware that LV is using this means of immortality when Harry gives him the Diary. Perhaps JKR is positioning Ginny to have some serious issues the manifest themselves first in anger, and then in @$$-kicking power when she finally gets a chance to come face to face with the cause of her mental boggart. In summary: Ginny is a teenage, female, fiery red-head (says Ginger) who has been coddled and is trying to break free from her *baby* role in the family. She has issues to deal with from her first year that she needs to confront. She is at an age where she is becoming her own person in very trying and scary times. Her world is changing- war, hormones, big brother introducing an outsider to the family, posession by an evil entity- the usual things that get kids riled up at that age. Maybe this is foreshadowing that her experiences with Diary!Tom will be used in the future. DD did say that he could find very few people from whom to extract memories of Tom, before or after his EvilLordship phase, and DD thought it was important that they find out all they could about him in his past as he is a creature of habit. Ginny is probably sitting on a piece of info that she has no idea is important. The diary was written in his 5th year, but he wasn't in the Horcrux manufacturing business at that point, so Diary! Tom wouldn't be very guarded about letting things slip that LV would later use in hiding a Horcrux; and LV would have no way of letting Diary!Tom know to keep his mouth shut. Not sure how much of that last part is related to Ginny's anger. Just that one thought flowed into the other. For what it's worth. Ginger, no longer a red-head, but still fiery. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun May 7 11:43:43 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 11:43:43 -0000 Subject: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151949 > Angie replies: > > Actually, I hadn't thought of that. It was also mentioned in the very > first chapter. It just seemed like foreshadowing for the last book, > which would apparently mean we can look forward to a lot more > Dementors (BTW, how long does it take them to become "adults?") Potioncat: The mist seems to be everywhere, but it doesn't seem to really do anything...yet. I'm just wondering if there's going to be an army of Dementors next book? and I wonder if we'll see Snape's method of dealing with them? Angie: > Honestly, the first time I read this, I was shocked. I couldn't help > but think of the Alfred Hitchcock movie. I don't know why this "came > off" to me worse than any of the other spells that any of the > students have cast on each other (to this point in the story), but it > did. Potioncat: Oh, me too. But first the birds reminded me of Disney's "Snow White" waiting for her prince to come. Quite a contrast. Oops, by mistake I snipped Angie's part about Krum. Isn't he supposed to reappear. How will this "reminder" of him play into his appearance. Or was this it? > Angie again: > Nah, I actually had that one figured out. Maybe the only thing in > the entire series, mind you. If I was Hermione, I would work on > being a little less predictable. Like Harry, I expected Hermione to > jump to the wrong conclusion, for Ron to think Harry had done it, and > therefore, to make it a self-fullfulling prophesy. Potioncat: I took this one hook line and sinker. I was expecting a good Harry/Snape confrontation when Snape discovered it, as I knew he would. I was actually shocked that Harry was doing such a thing. To my credit, I knew we were being tricked with Slughorn and the DADA position. From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Sun May 7 12:55:40 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 08:55:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060507125540.959.qmail@web37201.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151950 Betsy Hp: I agree with Ceridwen here. While Hermione worded it as Ginny being more herself, she's actually suggesting Ginny *not* be herself. And Ginny does go out and practice her quidditch (which *had* to have occured in the middle of the night -- no other logistic works for a place like the Burrow) so she can join the team too. So Ginny is putting *a lot* of work into being the sort of girl she knows Harry is interested in. Catherine now: Actually, (IIRC) Ginny started breaking into their broomshed from the age of 6 to ride their brooms. Four years before she ever saw Harry. I think her love of Qudditch (or at least fl;ying) has nothing to do with Harry. In fact, she comes from a family of strong Quidditch players. Why can't her fondness for the game be from admiring her brother Charlie rather than her crush on Harry? Not everything about Ginny has to do with her love of Harry. She probably did like Micheal and Dean, at least a bit. I don't think she would have prostituted herself just to forget about Harry. (And I do consider making out with someone rather heatedly, if you have absolutely no feeling for them prostituting herself, it's very cold and calculating, and I don't see Ginny that way.) Is there a rule that you can't like 2 people at the same time? You can't marry 2 people at the same time, but I certainly think that your teenage years are for discovery. It's very rare that the first person you date is the right person for you. There's trial and error. You have to discover yourself, and how you relate to the opposite sex. I think Ginny is a normal teenage girl. Happy one minute, and angry the next, and crying right after. Who hasn't had days like these as a teenager? Catherine --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail --------------------------------- Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Sun May 7 13:12:46 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 09:12:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060507131246.2007.qmail@web37206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151951 Jennifer Carlson wrote: Jen: You know, as a mother myself I can quite honestly say that rewarding my child for showing such strength of character would be FAR more important to me than rewarding him for following the rules at the risk of discarding any sense of humanitarianism and care for other human beings...why should that be ANY different in this situation? Catherine now: This reminds me of a moment in the Special Olympics that happened many years ago, and since I don't have a pensieve, my memory might be a little off. But the gist of it was a group of these athletes where running a race and someone fell. (This is were I get blurry) It was either one of the other racers or all of the other racers, stopped and helped the fallen racer up and helped them to finish the race. Again, this is blurry, but I think that everyone crossed the line at the same time as the fallen racer, so that everyone was a winner. Even if it was just the one person who helped the fallen racer up and helped them cross the line, it shows what is really important. And it's not the race. I agree with Jen, that if one of my children decided to forfeit a race, that was very important to them, to help a friend and/or a stranger, I would be way prouder of them than if they had won the race. Again, I believe that Harry made the choice to do what was right (in his mind) as opposed to what was easy. He could not in good conscious leave the other hostages behind. And it wasn't only Hermione and Cho he was worried about, but the little sister of a competitor, whom he didn't really like, who treated him as a naughty little boy. I was very proud of Harry after that scene, very proud indeed. There are many more things important to winning a race, and that is another part of the power that he has, that the Dark Lord knows not. Catherine --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail - --------------------------------- Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Sun May 7 13:29:30 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 09:29:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060507132930.86014.qmail@web37205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151952 horridporrid03 wrote: So while I think embarrassment and annoyance at interfering brothers drives some of her anger, to my mind there's something else going on. Maybe the "not the baby anymore" stuff. Or even the "*when* will Harry finally notice me?" stuff. (With a bit of the Bill just *cannot* get married on the side.) Catherine now: And not to forget that this also happens after the battle at the MoM where Sirius gets killed (?) and Tonks gravely injured. A lot of stuff happened for Ginny between the ages of 14 and 15. In fact, she's had a very sheltered life at The Burrow, get possessed by TR at the age of 11, nearly loses her father, fights DE's & gets injured, knows a man (whose house she stayed at, so whom she knew well enough) who gets killed, all this at the age of 14. And the darkest wizard of all time has returned to full power. (Although that was the year previous). That's a lot to be happening for a 14-15 year old girl. Catherine --------------------------------- Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 7 13:38:19 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 13:38:19 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151953 > Betsy Hp: > But, if you'd never read a single interview and had to base your > judgement of Ginny soley on what you've read in the books, doesn't > it seem that she's not fiery, she's out and out angry? I mean, she > nearly *cries* in the hallway scene. That's anger. Major, major > anger. > > I'm just wondering if Ginny has been placed on too high a pedestal > by JKR's declaration that she's "Harry's perfect girl". Pippin: Wait, wait, wait. When did "Harry's perfect girl" get translated into "faultless paragon"? IMO, Ginny is supposed to be "perfect" not in the sense that she's flawless, but in that her flaws are understood and accepted by Harry. *He's* not turned off by her anger, far from it. That may be one of the reasons JKR decided to show us angry Ginny. Harry could never understand it when Cho was angry, and Hermione's anger scares him to death -- how many times has he held something back for fear of her reaction? But Ginny's anger is utterly comprehensible to him and not scary -- she doesn't cry or nag or do something sneaky, she just gets loud and physical. Harry has loads of experience dealing with that -- it's, well, it's the Dursley school of anger management, and Harry has a graduate degree. By dating other boys, Ginny was able to determine that her feelings for Harry were real, different from the way she felt about other boys, and more than physical. But I agree with everyone who said that she hadn't visualized being told she was making herself cheap by her own brother in front of the young man she had special feelings for. Also, though Harry tries to say that Ron didn't mean it, the chest monster was roaring its approval and being Harry's perfect girl, Ginny no doubt picked up on that. Of course she was beside herself, who wouldn't be? Naturally she takes out her anger at herself on other people-- that's something everyone in this book does. Our young heroes have to learn to take responsibility for their failures and accept that just because a consequence was unintended doesn't mean someone else is to blame for it. That's for book 7, I think. Pippin From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun May 7 14:00:48 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 14:00:48 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: <20060507125540.959.qmail@web37201.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151954 Betsy Hp: > > I agree with Ceridwen here. While Hermione worded it as Ginny being more herself, she's actually suggesting Ginny *not* be herself. And Ginny does go out and practice her quidditch (which *had* to have occured in the middle of the night -- no other logistic works for a place like the Burrow) so she can join the team too. So Ginny is putting *a lot* of work into being the sort of girl she knows Harry is interested in. Catherine: *(snip)* > She probably did like Micheal and Dean, at least a bit. I don't think she would have prostituted herself just to forget about Harry. (And I do consider making out with someone rather heatedly, if you have absolutely no feeling for them prostituting herself, it's very cold and calculating, and I don't see Ginny that way.) Is there a rule that you can't like 2 people at the same time? Ceridwen: There's no reason why someone can't like two (or even more!) people at the same time. But Ginny says (HBP US hardcover pg 647): "I never really gave up on you," she said. "Not really. I always hoped... Hermione told me to get on with life, maybe go out with some other people, relax a bit around you, because I never used to be able to talk if you were in the room, remember? And she thought you might take a bit more notice if I was a bit more -- myself." She took Hermione's advice, never giving up, she'd always hoped... to finally snag Harry in the end. And I read that last pause before 'myself' as a hesitation because she doesn't quite believe she's been herself until she got with Harry. So, I do see Ginny's dating other boys when she has never given up on being with Harry as something cold and calculating, designed to get Harry's attention. I'm sure other people see it differently. But this is the way I see it. It makes me think more about Ginny now. Will there be problems with her following other people? TR in CoS, Hermione for apparently several years for her love life (and is Hermione the best person to give love advice?). Ceridwen. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 7 14:11:48 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 14:11:48 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151955 > Pippin: > The rules seem to be that scoring is totally within the judges' > discretion, just like the scoring for the House Cup. > > a_svirn: > If you can call that rules Besides, your simile is not particularly > accurate. In the House Cup points are being awarded for pretty much > everything, whereas in the tournament the participants had concrete > tasks to accomplish. It follows, therefore, that points should have > been awarded for the accomplishment of these tasks. Pippin: It doesn't follow at all. The fact is, we don't know how the tasks are scored -- it could be the way you suggest, or it could be like figure skating, where you are scored on artistic merit as well as technical performance. Harry doesn't get complete instructions for the second task -- as in the House Cup contest in PS/SS, he shows up late, and doesn't get to check his possibly imperfect understanding of the rules against anyone else's. It doesn't help that Dobby told him his Weezy would be lost. I have a feeling this is one of JKR's Inkling moments -- we're being asked to consider whether miracles are really God bending the rules, or is it just that we have a very imperfect, limited understanding of what the rules are. > > Pat: > How do we know that anyone, if caught, goes unpunished? I have no > recollection of anything from canon that discusses this. > > a_svirn: > Because they cannot be disqualified ? these magical contracts see to > it. The worst that can be done is (presumably) the subtraction of > points. And that's no big deal ? because judges can cheat by > awarding points unfairly (like Karkaroff) and without fear of > reprisal. And even if you get 0 points you are allowed to enter the > maze. Indeed, that's an honour you cannot refuse. Pippin: Oh, there's fear of reprisal. As Karkaroff says, if his champion is not treated fairly, Durmstrang will not participate next time. Dumbledore asked if anyone had an alternative to letting Harry compete as the fourth Hogwarts champion, and no one did. It's not as if he railroaded everyone into accepting Harry. In any case, the argument that widespread cheating invalidates the rules doesn't work in the real world -- try it in tax court and see how far it gets you :) Pippin From belviso at attglobal.net Sun May 7 15:29:09 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 11:29:09 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship/legitimacy References: Message-ID: <006201c671ea$fccf5550$3166400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151956 Jen: You know, as a mother myself I can quite honestly say that rewarding my child for showing such strength of character would be FAR more important to me than rewarding him for following the rules at the risk of discarding any sense of humanitarianism and care for other human beings...why should that be ANY different in this situation? Magpie: No one has disagreed that good character is more important and more difficult than following the rules in a sporting event. People noting the lack of fair rules in this event should not be subject to implied lack of character any more than the other contestants should be. It is possible to value good character over the rules of a game while still thinking that games should be played with some kind of rules. In fact, many of the people who didn't like this plot twist much feel that rewarding it undercuts that very message of games not mattering as much as character. If this were my kid I, as his mother, could certainly reward him for holding humanitarian principles above the rules of a game--I could praise him in the car on the way home. If my son missed a fly ball in his little league game because he was off helping another kid I wouldn't demand he be given credit for catching the ball because he would surely have caught it had he been standing there and he showed better character by not caring about the game enough to put it over another player's feelings anyway. That's not building character, that's making the game meaningless and being an interfering, biased mother. In the original Bad News Bears there's a great scene where a boy pulls a stunt to stand up to his bully of a father. It costs his team the lead, and it's generally considered a great moment of a kid showing character. It seems like even the kids in the game understand that on some level. But there's no do-over, the runs still count. The judges don't decide that since the Yankees' pitcher chose to hold on to the ball while the other team scored, and blatantly interfered with his team's ability to stop them scoring, and did so because he was fighting a much more important battle than the game, he deserves credit within the game for that. His credit comes off the field, not on. Pippin: I have a feeling this is one of JKR's Inkling moments -- we're being asked to consider whether miracles are really God bending the rules, or is it just that we have a very imperfect, limited understanding of what the rules are. Magpie: The "we have imperfect, limited understanding of what the rules are" doesn't work for me in religion either, so that analogy seems to invite criticism of religion, not shed a good light on what's going on in the story. I think it's still just the author prefering to end this task this way because she feels it's more satisfying. Maybe she thinks this needs to happen so that there's a message that holding something else more important than a game is the right thing to do, like if Harry "suffered" for it by being behind in points it wouldn't come through or something. Catherine Higgins: It was either one of the other racers or all of the other racers, stopped and helped the fallen racer up and helped them to finish the race. Again, this is blurry, but I think that everyone crossed the line at the same time as the fallen racer, so that everyone was a winner. Magpie: Except the TWT isn't the Special Olympics and everyone is definitely not a winner. Harry is the winner. -m From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun May 7 16:42:26 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 16:42:26 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151957 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > a_svirn: Magical contracts in effect make hostages out of champions, completely at the mercy of the hosts and the jury and pretty much everyone else. The question is therefore WHY did Dumbledore feel it necessary to introduce them? > To include one rule that renders all the other rules defunct? Tonks: I am not a big sports fan in any world. Therefore, I haven't been following this discussion very closely, so forgive me if I am total off here. I am not aware that it is DD who sets the rules for the Tri-wizard Tournament. I thought they were very old rules that can not be changed. Rules that perhaps only a few totally understand. I wonder if part of the game isn't to figure out the rules as one goes. The Tri-wizard Tournament is like the Olympics. It is a very old game and has its own rules written long ago. Unlike the Olympics the rules are magical rules and enforcing on all that come after. They can not be changed or updated. It has been awile since I read GOF. How is DD involved in making any of the rules? Tonks_op Who can't tell a Bludger from a pin-pong ball. (Ouch! Rubs head.) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun May 7 17:14:38 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 17:14:38 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy -There are Rule then there are Rules In-Reply-To: <006201c671ea$fccf5550$3166400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151958 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > Magpie: > No one has disagreed that good character is more important and > more difficult than following the rules in a sporting event. > ...edited... > > If this were my kid I, as his mother, could certainly reward him > for holding humanitarian principles above the rules of a game--I > could praise him in the car on the way home. If my son missed a > fly ball in his little league game because he was off helping > another kid I wouldn't demand he be given credit for catching > the ball because he would surely have caught it had he been > standing there and he showed better character by not caring > about the game enough to put it over another player's feelings > anyway. ...edited... > > -m > bboyminn: I really have a problem with people using standard sports analogies to describe the Tri-Wizards Tournement. Yes, there are general rules that guide the tournement, but each task does not have a thick book of 'rules of play' which controls it. Each task in conceptual; the rules are contained in the defining of the task. For example, the rules for the Dragon Task are to 'get /past/ the dragon' and get the egg, which makes it clear that 'Accio Egg' is outside the rules. But the manner of solving the task is wide open and freeform as long as it conform to the basic concept of the task. And, the judging is very subjective. Each judge within his own mind determines the quality, ingenuity, and character of the solution. Again, this is much more like figure skating than baseball. Further, as I said before, I do think character is an aspect of judgement. The judges aren't looking at the pure mechanics of the solution; he got the egg-full points, he didn't get the egg-no points. They are looking at the abstract qualities such as uniqueness, inventiveness, ingenuity, resourcefullness, and I believe to a degree the character reflected in the play and the player. While KarKaroff was irritated that Harry was given extra points, he did not formally protest which he surely would have if it was against the rules. Cedric was given 47 out of fifty, which means Karkaroff gave Cedric a 7 out of 10. Harry was given 45 out of fifty, which implies that Karkaroff still gave Harry FIVE points for his task. On a final note, Fleur who failed completely was STILL given 25 points. Maybe we should consider her 25 points cheating. Why should she be given any points for failing the task? Why should she get what we might metaphorically consider a 'do over'? Also, note that Madam Maxime awarded Harry full points even though that hurt her own champion. Certainly, if she felt it was unfair or against the rules, she would have deducted points or protested. Last point, no judges formally protested, and more importantly, none of the other contestants complained, in fact, it seems as if their respect for Harry grew because of the 'character' he showed in the Underwater task, and none of them seem to begrudge him the points he earned. While the overal tournement is formed around specific rules, I think the rules for each task are very basic and general. I really don't think there were specific ridged rules of play controlling individual tasks like those found in Soccer or Baseball. The tasks were conceptual and the judging was subjective. I'm not denying anyone the right to think otherwise, but so far, no one has convinced me, and so far, I haven't seen any evidence that the rule of play for each task were as precise as is typical in a muggle team sports. These were very much freeform tasks, that only had basic conceptual rules as guidelines. COnsequently, the judges were well withing their rights to award points as they saw fit. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun May 7 18:04:12 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 18:04:12 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151959 Alla: Dumbledore IMO does the similar thing in PS/SS. He awards the points to Neville for moral courage and JKR did say that she specifically wanted to make a point of how important moral courage is. a_svirn: And how important is that? He gave him ten points for moral courage and fifty points apiece to Hermione and Ron for keeping cool logic in the face of fire and for the best game of chess Hogwarts seen in years respectively. Does it mean that having a cool head on one's shoulders and being a good chess player ranks higher on Dumbledore's personal scale than being morally courageous? Five times higher, to be exact? Alla: Was Neville standing up to his friends stupid? Yes, I would definitely say so, since he was an additional obstacle on their quest to "save the stone from Snape" for all they knew. But for Neville they could have gotten there faster. a_svirn: Yes, but for all *he* knew they were up to their tricks which would probably cost Gryffindor another hundred of points unless he'd stop them. Why then was it so stupid? Perfectly sensible, I'd say. Alla: Such example is the Pierre de Coubertein medal for true sportsmanship that gets awarded on the Olimpics. Here is the brief story from Wikipedia about one recipient of this medal. Of course, nobody awarded him the second place in the race, which he abandoned, but he did not leave without recognition and that recognition IMO was rightfully his, just as Harry's points for moral fiber were IMO rightfully his. a_svirn: You've just provided the perfect foil for Dumbledore's unfairness. Samaranch unlike Dumbledore managed to reward Lemieux without punishing other combatants. Dumbledore rewarded Harry at the expense of the others. Because this is completion and Harry's reward was Krum's and Cedric's punishment ? they had to give up their fairly gained advantage. And surely they didn't deserve it. It wasn't their fault that they were clever enough not to think the worst of Dumbledore. Pippin: The fact is, we don't know how the tasks are scored -- it could be the way you suggest, or it could be like figure skating, where you are scored on artistic merit as well as technical performance. a_svirn: Artistic merit in figure skating is only *one* of the grades, though. And your place in the contest is depended on *both* of them. If you fail technical performance, you can hope to gain some more points for artistic merit. What's more, *all* the participants get evaluated on both scores. Harry, however, ended up being the only one whose fiber was evaluated. It implies that Krum's, Cedric's and Fleur's either wasn't evaluated at all (imagine that only one figure- skater get points for technical performance and artistic merits both while all his opponents only get marks for technical performance), or got next to nothing in terms of points. Which, surely, was grossly unfair either way. Pippin: Oh, there's fear of reprisal. As Karkaroff says, if his champion is not treated fairly, Durmstrang will not participate next time. a_svirn: Yes, that must have made them quake in their shoes. Pippin: In any case, the argument that widespread cheating invalidates the rules doesn't work in the real world -- try it in tax court and see how far it gets you :) a_svirn: It wasn't quite what I said though. My point is that including one rule that *allows* cheating (magical contract) invalidates all the other rules. Tonks: I am not aware that it is DD who sets the rules for the Tri-wizard Tournament. I thought they were very old rules that can not be changed. Rules that perhaps only a few totally understand. I wonder if part of the game isn't to figure out the rules as one goes. a_svirn: The Tournament is above all a very dangerous game. There have been deaths in the past, champions and spectators having been slain during the proceedings. If Dumbledore consented to host such an event without even perfectly understanding its rules he was either the world's most irresponsible person or senile. As for being one who sets the rules ? he did set the age limit rule. Could have abolished magical contracts if he wanted to. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun May 7 20:44:13 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 20:44:13 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151960 > >>Betsy HP: > > What they *did* do was increase Harry's personal glory. > >>Jen: > You know, as a mother myself I can quite honestly say that rewarding > my child for showing such strength of character would be FAR more > important to me than rewarding him for following the rules at the > risk of discarding any sense of humanitarianism and care for other > human beings...why should that be ANY different in this situation? Betsy Hp: Okay, what about this: Your child is a cross-country runner and is in a big meet. You're standing at the finish line, and here she comes, ahead of the pack. She's won. Except, hang on, behind your daughter another runner had gotten into trouble. Another racer abandoned the race to help the injured runner and the judges declare the runner who stopped to help the actual winner. Because they were so very humanitarian. Would you feel your child had been treated fairly? Would you be comfortable with the implication that your daughter *wasn't* a humanitarian? And what if one of the judges was the grandfather of the "humanitarian" winner? Would you still see this as an example of good sportsmanship? I'd also add that good sportsmanship is supposed to be it's *own* reward. That's the whole point. That's why I think the actions of the judges actually *cheapened* Harry's decision. They turned it into a question of winning or losing, when good sportsmanship should be above such petty things. "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game" is not empty rhetoric. And one shouldn't do humanitarian things for the reward. > >>Alla: > sportsmanship> > Of course, nobody awarded him the second place in the race, which he > abandoned, but he did not leave without recognition and that > recognition IMO was rightfully his, just as Harry's points for moral > fiber were IMO rightfully his. Betsy Hp: Which would mean then, that there is a competition over who has the most "moral fiber". Which means that rather than judging someone on their sport abilities the Triwizard Tournament judges people on their actual worth as people. Which means we've just found out that Harry is a better person than Krum, Cedric and Fluer. Does anyone else see something intrinsically ugly in that sort of competition? Because the Olympics don't try and decide which Olympian is the better person. They look for the fastest, the strongest, etc. The sporstmanship medal is something else entirely. And it is (correctly) held apart from the actual sporting events. > >>bboyminn: > I really have a problem with people using standard sports analogies > to describe the Tri-Wizards Tournement. > > The tasks were conceptual and the judging was subjective. > > I'm not denying anyone the right to think otherwise, but so far, no > one has convinced me, and so far, I haven't seen any evidence that > the rule of play for each task were as precise as is typical in a > muggle team ports. These were very much freeform tasks, that only > had basic conceptual rules as guidelines. COnsequently, the judges > were well withing their rights to award points as they saw fit. Betsy Hp: Honestly, I think you're right. Sport is clean (or strives to be). The Triwizard Tournament is ugly, and seems to take pride in that fact. It's a political sham where the three headmasters use their students as pawns to futher their own glory. No wonder sportsmanship goes out the window. Wizards don't understand the concept. So they come up with the silly "moral fiber" points. If this were a sport, that sort of "judging" would never fly. It's unfair. In every possible way. And it cheapens (or attempts to anyway) Harry. The Triwizard Tournament tried to turn Harry into a typical corrupt wizard. (Part of the reason Voldemort was eager for Harry to compete maybe?) > >>houyhnhnm: > This is the conclusion I have been coming to as I have followed this > thread. I have been flipping back through some of the earlier books > (at random, not any systematic way) and I have been struck several > times by Harry's fundamental decency in his early confrontations with > the Wizarding World... > > It is not Harry who shows unsportsman-like proclivities, but the > world of which he has become a part. Betsy Hp: We do see this time and time again. The WW is the epitome of unfair, where the rules apply differently depending on who you are. Sometimes the unfairness works in Harry's favor, sometimes it doesn't. The good thing about Harry, is that he (for the most part) does recognize when he's been given an unfair advantage. Not all the time. But he has still managed to maintain a basic sense of fairplay. > >>houyhnhnm: > I have been wondering whether or not the corruption in the WW is > somehow connected with the moral fragmentation in that world as > evidenced by the House divisions at Hogwarts. Just as ambition is > apportioned solely to Slytherin (and is allowed to be expressed in a > debased rather than a virtuous way), so the concept of fair play is > allotted solely to Hufflepuff, rather than being integrated into > Wizard culture as a whole. Betsy Hp: Ooh, interesting! Especially since it's a Hufflepuff that's chosen as the Hogwarts champion (Cedric had a strong sense of fairplay). And since Hufflepuff is a house pretty universally looked down on it suggestive that fairplay is looked down on as well. It also explains the Hufflepuff distrust of outsiders. It will be very intersting how JKR ends the books. We've already seen that the MoM is a mess. I can't imagine that she'll show it fixed, but will she be able to show the WW starting to head in the right direction? Betsy Hp From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun May 7 20:59:15 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 20:59:15 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151963 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: a_svirn: > The Tournament is above all a very dangerous game. There have been > deaths in the past, champions and spectators having been slain > during the proceedings. If Dumbledore consented to host such an > event without even perfectly understanding its rules he was either > the world's most irresponsible person or senile. > As for being one who sets the rules ? he did set the age limit rule. > Could have abolished magical contracts if he wanted to. Geoff: Being pedantic, he didn't and he couldn't . '"Eager though I know all of you will be to bring the Triwizard Cup to Hogwarts," he (Dumbledore) said, "the Heads of the participating schools, along with the Ministry of Magic, have agreed to impose an age restriction on contenders this year, Only students who are of age - that is to say, seventeen years or older - will be allowed to put forward their names for consideration."' (GOF "The Triwizard Tournament" p.166 UK edition) So he was only one of a minimum of five people involved in decision making. We know that Dumbledore then put in an age line to "police" this rule ? and it worked. He points out to Fred and George after their abortive attempt that two other Hogwarts students - one from Hufflepuff and one from Ravenclaw - had already failed in their attempts. (It's interesting to see that Slytherin were behaving themselves!). At this point in time, it does not seem likely to the organisers that there will be any conflict between the age limit and the binding contract. No one is to know that there is an impostor in the school whose agenda is to use the Tournament as a tool to destroy Harry and thus the Wizarding World, someone who will confound the Goblet into "thinking" that Harry is a bona fide competitor and thus throw a spanner in the works. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun May 7 21:20:01 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 21:20:01 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151964 Carol wrote: > > Ideas, anyone? What do you think Snape will be up to, mostly off page, > in Book 7? Surely all those revelations about him in HBP don't lead to > a dead end on the tower. > > Carol, knowing that it's silly to worry about a fictional character > whose fate and redemption are outside her control but concerned for > Snape's soul nonetheless Potioncat: Well, the only thing I'm sure of is that JKR has a big surprise up her sleeve. It certainly doesn't seem that the Order members we saw expected anything like the Tower to happen. If anyone else did (Moody? Aberforth?) we'll have to wait to find out. I suspect that Snape will be off page most of HBP, with some sort of big scene with Harry at the end. OR, that we'll see him something like we did in Spinner's End. OR we'll hear he's doing things via the Daily Prophet. I think Harry will be getting information from Snape without knowing who the information is coming from. Think Polyjuice and "If I didn't know how to act..." In another thread Snape is offered up as a hero type. I know Harry as hero of a genre (with the genre being in dispute) has come up. But has anyone ever considered that we might end up with several literary types of heroes? Is the series big enough for that? From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun May 7 22:00:40 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 22:00:40 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151965 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > And Ginny does go out and practice her quidditch (which > > *had* to have occured in the middle of the night -- no other > > logistic works for a place like the Burrow) so she can join the > > team too. So Ginny is putting *a lot* of work into being the > > sort of girl she knows Harry is interested in. > >>Catherine: > Actually, (IIRC) Ginny started breaking into their broomshed from > the age of 6 to ride their brooms. > Betsy Hp: Oh, I'm not saying Ginny wasn't interested in quidditch from birth. You're right that she's part of a pretty quidditch mad family so her interest makes sense that way. But once Ginny starts going to school with her brothers her "secret quidditch practice" time at the Burrow is limited. I'm sure she'd be able to practice at Hogwarts without her brothers knowing. But at the Burrow, the only time she could do something like that is at night. Which, to my mind, speaks of a pretty intense ambition. Something that's been jump-started. > >>Catherine: > > *(snip)* > > She probably did like Micheal and Dean, at least a bit. I don't > > think she would have prostituted herself just to forget about > > Harry. > > > > Is there a rule that you can't like 2 people at the same time? > >>Ceridwen: > There's no reason why someone can't like two (or even more!) > people at the same time. > > So, I do see Ginny's dating other boys when she has never given up > on being with Harry as something cold and calculating, designed to > get Harry's attention. Betsy Hp: Not to mention Hermione does the exact same thing in HBP when she dates McLaggan (I think his name was). I wouldn't say Hermione prosituted herself, but she was playing a game. I think Ginny was playing a similar, but not *quite* as calculating, game. We know she's pretty and boys have noticed her. So I think she decided to not wait around for Harry. I think she did feel a bit of an attraction for Michael. But, in her own words it never eclipsed her attraction for Harry. It's not like she *married* Michael, though. She just dated him. And when his annoying traits (maybe his "not Harry" traits?) started to outweigh his attractive traits, she dumped him. Dean was a little harder, because I get the feeling Dean is a very non-annoying guy. But again, he's not Harry. So, yeah, Ginny dated boys she wasn't in love with. I don't think that's the same thing as prostitution. And I also don't think she purposefully chose boys that would annoy Harry (unlike Hermione) so I don't see Ginny as being coldly calculating. She just attempted to live like Harry wasn't important. It was dishonest but not horrible. > >>Ceridwen: > > It makes me think more about Ginny now. Will there be problems > with her following other people? TR in CoS, Hermione for > apparently several years for her love life (and is Hermione the > best person to give love advice?). Betsy Hp: That's an interesting point. And it's interesting that when she does start dating Harry she seems to sour on Hermione a bit. So maybe Ginny still needs to figure out who she is? If she does come into her own in book 7 I'm betting it'll happend rather quickly. > >>Pippin: > Wait, wait, wait. When did "Harry's perfect girl" get translated > into "faultless paragon"? IMO, Ginny is supposed to be "perfect" > not in the sense that she's flawless, but in that her flaws are > understood and accepted by Harry. *He's* not turned off by her > anger, far from it. That may be one of the reasons JKR decided to > show us angry Ginny. > Betsy Hp: For me I think it was more how JKR's quote was used in discussions. If someone called Ginny's actions in HBP cruel the argument came back, well JKR says she's perfect so her attacks must be a positive thing so therefore it just means she won't be pushed around. But yeah, I agree that Harry is not intimidated by Ginny's anger (unlike Ron or Hermione or poor Zacharias) in much the same way Ginny was not intimidated by Harry's anger in OotP. > >>Pippin: > Naturally she takes out her anger at herself on other people-- > that's something everyone in this book does. Our young heroes have > to learn to take responsibility for their failures and accept > that just because a consequence was unintended doesn't mean > someone else is to blame for it. > That's for book 7, I think. Betsy Hp: I agree. And I think that Ginny's anger is just as wrong and just as much a weakness for her (and those around her) as Harry's anger was in OotP. Hitting someone in the nose because they're asking you questions is not good behavior. Humiliating your brother because you're upset about something else is not good behavior. And bad sportsmanship is just bad. I do hope Ginny realizes that in book 7. I hope that her anger and the cruelity it unleashes is seen as a part of her character that needs to be worked on rather than celebrated. > >>Betsy Hp: > > However, Ginny is *consistently* angry at this point. > > > > Which points away from JKR being a bad writer and > > towards something being up with Ginny. > >>Ginger: > I may have connected some dots here. Tell me what you think. > At the beginning of the book, we are told the the dementors are > breeding. At the beginning of this very chapter, (Potioncat > pointed out) the mist was very strong. If we go back to PoA, the > three who were most effected by the dementors were Harry, Neville > and Ginny. > > I think she is now the person most effected by dementors because > she has had no catharsis (sp?) and has not been able to work out > those feelings. > Betsy Hp: I really like the idea of Ginny's story not being finished yet. She did strike me as over the top in HBP, but then most teenagers strike me as over the top. But it would make sense if her frustration over her Harry crush, her brother's marriage, the tension of Voldemort's return (I can see Molly becoming *very* clingy), and her raging hormones got a jump-kick by the Dementor's breeding. (Suddenly I am put in mind of a group of menstruating women. ) Betsy Hp From padfoot.rules at yahoo.com Sun May 7 17:21:07 2006 From: padfoot.rules at yahoo.com (Brianna Kinney) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 10:21:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060507172107.71440.qmail@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151966 gelite67 wrote: I'm not saying Hermione's unnattractive. I just don't know if she believes she is attractive, which would affect her self esteem, especially since Ron is so obviously attracted to Fleur, who is apparently quite fetching. :) There also seems a stark contrast to me between the way Fleur and Ginny are described, compared to Hermione -- like JKR goes out of her way to point out that Hermione may not be "conventionally" pretty. And don't get me wrong. I think that's a great message for young girls, most of whom are not like Fleur and Ginny. BK here: Coming out of lurkdom to add my two cents. I like the phrase JKR uses that Hermione isn't "conventionally" pretty. I interpret that to mean she has some nice features that when paid attention to (i.e. hair and makeup) on special occasions takes others by surprise. I think she (Hermione) mentions somewhere after the Yule Ball that she can't be bothered with the effort it took to tame her hair for that event on a daily basis. That implied she has more important things to do with her time, than fuss with her hair. She's clean and her clothes are tidy and pressed. What else does she need? She's in the business of getting an education not primping for the boys. And I think that's a great message for girls. Also, I liked the way the scene was played in POA when Sirius told her she really was the most gifted witch of her age, or something to that effect. She looked like someone might after being told she was the most gorgeous thing in shoe leather. I don't think Hermoine thinks she's unattractive; she's got a very strong sense of self...at least that's my take on her. gelite said: And Ron and McGlaggen and Victor were obviously attracted to her, for whatever reasons. So really, she can't be all that shabby in the looks department. BK again: Hermoine has a strong personality, loads of confidence, and a quick, agile mind. I think those things are attractive on their own. I really can't imagine Victor or Ron putting up with a pretty airhead--or in Ron's case, at least, not for long. LOL Plus she doesn't look like that Pansy girl with the "pug" face even if she doesn't "glam up" everyday; although, once you're truly friends with someone I don't think looks matter all that much. BK ~ padfoot rules because sirius black fan was taken ~ From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 7 22:35:20 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 22:35:20 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151967 Betsy HP > > Would you feel your child had been treated fairly? Would you be > comfortable with the implication that your daughter *wasn't* a > humanitarian? And what if one of the judges was the grandfather of > the "humanitarian" winner? Would you still see this as an example of > good sportsmanship? Pippin: Huh? So they should stop awarding the Nobel Peace Prize because it's unfair to other humanitarians? Are you saying that if you were Cedric, you'd never have offered to cede the cup to Harry because Harry had been given an unfair advantage in entering the maze? It's really a question of expectations -- if you think that character shouldn't count, then it's going to seem unfair that Dumbledore "all of a sudden" decided to award points for character. But if you think that was part of the contest all along, then there's nothing to complain about. I would think Cedric is more familiar with the rules and customs of the TWT than we are, and he obviously doesn't think he's been treated unfairly. Does this debate remind anyone else of the Kobayashi Maru secenario http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru and the question of whether Star Fleet should have commended Capt. Kirk for reprogramming the test? Do people who think Dumbledore was showing bias also think that Capt. Kirk should have been disqualified for cheating? In the movie, the downside of Capt. Kirk's success was that he had no experience of failure, so that the movie could show him coping with it for the first time. But JKR had already shown Harry in failure and defeat with the Quidditch cup in PS/SS and the match with Hufflepuff in PoA. Instead of showing us Harry defeated again, JKR gives Harry a victory in the TWT which turns out to be a hollow one, for which he wishes to have no glory and no reward. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 7 22:56:50 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 22:56:50 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151968 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > a_svirn: > You've just provided the perfect foil for Dumbledore's unfairness. > Samaranch unlike Dumbledore managed to reward Lemieux without > punishing other combatants. Dumbledore rewarded Harry at the expense > of the others. Because this is completion and Harry's reward was > Krum's and Cedric's punishment ? they had to give up their fairly > gained advantage. And surely they didn't deserve it. It wasn't their > fault that they were clever enough not to think the worst of > Dumbledore. Alla: Well, you can look at it this way of course. But my point was that this athlete WAS rewarded for his character, for his moral fiber. He was rewarded SOMEHOW and that was my analogy (loose analogy of course, but analogy nevertheless). The argument had been repeated in this thread that Harry should not have been rewarded for what he did ( I am still wondering over the absolute certainty that "Character" was not evaluated in the Tournament, but that is of course up to grabs, since we don't have the written rules of TWT at our disposal) and I am arguing that character DOES matter and it also matters at the real world sport competitions and it does not go unrecognised at least sometimes. And I completely disagree that other champions were punished. They were just not rewarded. Because none of them tried to save other hostages. Now, if there is canon that other champions knew for sure that the hostages are not in danger, I will of course abandon this part of my argument, but I honestly don't remember any such canon. Hermione knew that they were not in danger. Have the other champions known that? > Betsy Hp: > Okay, what about this: Your child is a cross-country runner and is in > a big meet. You're standing at the finish line, and here she comes, > ahead of the pack. She's won. Except, hang on, behind your daughter > another runner had gotten into trouble. Another racer abandoned the > race to help the injured runner and the judges declare the runner who > stopped to help the actual winner. Because they were so very > humanitarian. > > Would you feel your child had been treated fairly? Would you be > comfortable with the implication that your daughter *wasn't* a > humanitarian? Alla: Of course it is hard to say what I would have done in the actual situation, BUT I know one thing I would NOT be upset with the judges giving the win to the runner who actually tried to save life ( although again, what you describe seem to work against actual sport rules, while IMO we don't know that "character" was not evaluated in TWT) and I am thinking that I would tell my child that I would want her to behave as the other runner did. > Pippin: > It's really a question of expectations -- if you think that character > shouldn't count, then it's going to seem unfair that Dumbledore > "all of a sudden" decided to award points for character. But if > you think that was part of the contest all along, then there's > nothing to complain about. I would think Cedric is more > familiar with the rules and customs of the TWT than we are, > and he obviously doesn't think he's been treated unfairly. Alla: I could not deny myself a pleasure of giving Pippin a big fat "ME TOO" :) Good to know we still agree on some things. :-) JMO, Alla From juli17 at aol.com Sun May 7 23:05:34 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 19:05:34 EDT Subject: Voldemort's offer/Snape Victorious Message-ID: <267.9d0d1e3.318fd73e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151969 Catlady wrote: When Snape learned that LV was planning to kill all three Potters, including Lily, he begged LV to spare Lily's life. In order to make such a plea without seeming totally soft-hearted. he asked for LV to give Lily to him as a gift. LV, pleased with Snape for something else, promised that he would do so if Lily didn't interfere with him killing her baby. Snape, knowing that Lily would never consent to such thing, decided to save her life by foiling LV's entire attack by warning Dumbledore about it. At that time, Dumbledore talked Snape into serving as his spy; also, Dumbledore warned the Potters and the Longbottoms that LV was after them, so they went into hiding. Julie: This is a workable theory, but I personally don't like it. I think Snape wanted to save all three of the Potters. Just because he hated James doesn't mean he wanted him dead (and there is that pesky life debt he owed James). I'd also hate to think Snape would be so willing an accomplice in the murder of an innocent baby. Also, Dumbledore's repeated admonitions of complete trust in Snape indicate to me that he believed Snape to be at heart a good man (unwilling to act beyond certain moral limits, whether we agree with where Snape draws those limits or not). I don't think he would have trusted Snape so completely if Snape changed sides simply out of a desire for revenge, to pay the life debt, to save his own hide, etc. Certainly he'd still be willing to use Snape, but *trust* him implicitly...no. Of course, Snape could have fooled Dumbledore. But I don't think so. (Or I don't want to think so!) Carol wrote: << As for other chapter titles that might be similarly misleading, how about "Snape Victorious," in which Snape seems to be achieving a long-cherished ambition but is in fact being publicly acknowledged as the latest appointee to a jinxed, or perhaps cursed, position that ultimately leads to disaster for him and for Hogwarts? >> Catlady wrote: I thought the title 'Snape Victorious' referred to Snape getting to enjoy a few minutes of verbally beating up on Harry without interference. Thus he was victorious over 'Tonks' who wanted to protect Harry. Julie: That doesn't make much sense to me, because Snape is repeatedly victorious in harassing Harry, and most of the time he doesn't encounter any interference. And while we don't know if Snape really had a long-cherished ambition to be the DADA teacher, it was certainly something others believed, particularly Harry. And Harry is our main protagonist, the eyes through which we see almost everything. So "Snape Victorious" to me indicates Harry's perception that Snape has achieved the victory he has so long desired, that of teaching DADA. But perception isn't always accurate, is it? ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun May 7 23:25:28 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 23:25:28 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151970 Geoff: Being pedantic, he couldn't have on his own. So he was only one of a minimum of five people involved in decision making. a_svirn: Fair point. But other four don't particularly interest me. That Bagman is involved in double-dealing of every kind, or Karkaroff is unfair etc. is only to be expected. That Dumbledore stoops to their level is something else again. Geoff: At this point in time, it does not seem likely to the organisers that there will be any conflict between the age limit and the binding contract. a_svirn: There isn't any conflict between the two. The magical contract is unfair by its very nature, because it is one-sided ? champions are magically compelled to compete, while the jury and the organizing committee have no compunction to be fair in return. Which means that champions are effectively their hostages for the duration of the tournament. Geoff: No one is to know that there is an impostor in the school whose agenda is to use The Tournament as a tool to destroy Harry and thus the Wizarding World, who will confound the Goblet into "thinking" that Harry is a bone fide competitor and thus throw a spanner in the works. a_svirn: For one thing Dumbledore could have an inkling that something of that nature might happen, since he was so adept in "reading the signs". For another what is the reason d'?tre of the binding contracts? Except for providing an excellent opportunity for cheating I can think of any. Alla: I am arguing that character DOES matter and it also matters at the real world sport competitions and it does not go unrecognised at least sometimes. a_svirn: But not at the expense of the others. Alla: And I completely disagree that other champions were punished. They were just not rewarded. Because none of them tried to save other hostages. a_svirn: They didn't HAVE TO save other hostages. What's wrong with Cedric's and Krum's character? Are you saying that they deliberately abandoned other hostages to the certain death? And they certainly *were* punished. For one thing this is the nature of contest: when your rival gains you loose. Since Harry should have been on the third place, and was promoted to the first, Cedric and Krum were correspondingly demoted ? Cedric should have had unchallenged advantage and had to share with Harry instead, and Krum had two people ahead of him instead of one. For what crime? For another thing, crediting Harry with points for fiber casts aspirations on Krum's and Cedric's fiber. They did exactly what they should have done and got ugly slurs cast on their character for their pains. Even you seem to doubt them. Alla: Now, if there is canon that other champions knew for sure that the hostages are not in danger, I will of course abandon this part of my argument, but I honestly don't remember any such canon. a_svirn: You mean to say that there was a logical possibility that Dumbledore would sacrifice his students in order to test champions' character? You are hard on the old man. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 00:00:12 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 00:00:12 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151971 > Geoff: > Being pedantic, he couldn't have on his own. > > So he was only one of a minimum of five people involved in decision > making. > > a_svirn: > Fair point. But other four don't particularly interest me. That > Bagman is involved in double-dealing of every kind, or Karkaroff is > unfair etc. is only to be expected. That Dumbledore stoops to their > level is something else again. Alla: Does Dumbledore stoops to their level? I thought that Geoff' s point was that without four others Dumbledore CANNOT do anything even if he would want to. > Alla: > And I completely disagree that other champions were punished. They > were just not rewarded. Because none of them tried to save other > hostages. > > a_svirn: > They didn't HAVE TO save other hostages. What's wrong with Cedric's > and Krum's character? Are you saying that they deliberately > abandoned other hostages to the certain death? Alla: If you show me the canon that other champions knew for sure that other hostages were not in danger then yes, I would agree with you that they did not have to save other hostages. Otherwise, I disagree, I don't think that Cedric and Victor deliberately bandoned the hostages, they just were concentrated on the "GAME" and IMO did not look at the big picture. They did not go as FAR as Harry did in this particular situation. Does it mean that I think that in this situation they did not show as much of "moral fiber" as Harry did? Yes, I think so. a_svirn: > And they certainly *were* punished. For one thing this is the nature > of contest: when your rival gains you loose. Since Harry should have > been on the third place, and was promoted to the first, Cedric and > Krum were correspondingly demoted ? Cedric should have had > unchallenged advantage and had to share with Harry instead, and Krum > had two people ahead of him instead of one. For what crime? Alla: For not thinking that the girl can DIE and they can prevent it. It is NOT a crime at all, but it is a failure on their part IMO, UNLESS of course as I said that canon exists showing that they were aware that Gabrielle is in no real danger. > Alla: > Now, if there is canon that other champions knew for sure that the > hostages are not in danger, I will of course abandon this part of my > argument, but I honestly don't remember any such canon. > > a_svirn: > You mean to say that there was a logical possibility that Dumbledore > would sacrifice his students in order to test champions' character? > You are hard on the old man. > Alla: No, I meant to say that we know for a fact that people DIED in TWT in the past and how can we exclude a possibility that one of the tasks can include the danger for the hostages too not just for the contestants. JMO, Alla From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 00:02:41 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 17:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060508000241.78272.qmail@web61318.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151972 a_svirn: They didn't HAVE TO save other hostages. What's wrong with Cedric's and Krum's character? Are you saying that they deliberately abandoned other hostages to the certain death? Joe: They either knew that the other hostages weren't in danger or they didn't care. If they knew then they had outside knowledge. They could have also just not given any thought to the other hostages. I think the latter is the case. a_svirn: And they certainly *were* punished. For one thing this is the nature of contest: when your rival gains you loose. Since Harry should have been on the third place, and was promoted to the first, Cedric and Krum were correspondingly demoted ? Cedric should have had unchallenged advantage and had to share with Harry instead, and Krum had two people ahead of him instead of one. For what crime? For another thing, crediting Harry with points for fiber casts aspirations on Krum's and Cedric's fiber. They did exactly what they should have done and got ugly slurs cast on their character for their pains. Even you seem to doubt them. Joe: The fact that Harry did something extraordinary and was rewarded for it does not cast slurs on any of the others. It merely shows that he went into the task with a different mind set, one that should be rewarded IMO. A teenaged boy put aside competion and glory to help someone he had never met and we are discussing if he has been given an unfair advantage. Setting aside that we have no idea what if any the rules were we do know that the judges have a great deal of latitude in scoring the events. Krum's head master gives Harry a score in the egg stealing event that is very out of line with the other judges. Joe From orgone9 at yahoo.com Sun May 7 23:56:32 2006 From: orgone9 at yahoo.com (Len Jaffe) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 16:56:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: Anima(l/gus) Portal /Lots of different comments on CHAPDISC / GoF /scapegoat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060507235632.34768.qmail@web80603.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151973 --- "Catlady wrote: > Harry always felt that his flying and Quidditch > ability was the only > ability that was really his, so I always wanted him > to find out that > he had gotten it from LV along with Parselmouth, > just to see his > emotions about it. But that won't happen now that > flying and Quidditch > are no longer important to Harry. I have a vision, of Harry, full of determination, flying on his Firebolt, under his invisbility cloak, at top speed, coming out of the sky like some miniature stealth fighter jet, drawing his wand and wreaking havoc on a gathering of death eaters (Malfoy family picnic?). Flight of the valkries anybody? Len. From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 8 00:44:04 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 20:44:04 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship/legitimacy References: Message-ID: <010801c67238$8212e810$3166400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151974 Alla: If you show me the canon that other champions knew for sure that other hostages were not in danger then yes, I would agree with you that they did not have to save other hostages. Otherwise, I disagree, I don't think that Cedric and Victor deliberately bandoned the hostages, they just were concentrated on the "GAME" and IMO did not look at the big picture. They did not go as FAR as Harry did in this particular situation. Does it mean that I think that in this situation they did not show as much of "moral fiber" as Harry did? Yes, I think so. Magpie: We have Ron laughing at the idea that Harry thought the hostages were in danger, and also laughing at the idea that the judges decided it was showing moral character. The merpeople, iirc, are laughing at Harry when he's trying to save the other hostages. We've also got the fact that the hostages weren't really in danger. Why should the other players have to prove they weren't completely confused about what was going on just because Harry was? Now Cedric and Krum are under suspicion of seeing people in danger and not doing anything to help them because they only cared about getting points in a game. That's a completely unfair slur on their character--and a pretty huge slur it is, too. Does Cedric Diggory really seem like the kind of guy who would not care about a little girl's life because he only cares about winning? Isn't this the same kid who gave Harry the hint about the egg because he thought it would only be fair? Joe: They either knew that the other hostages weren't in danger or they didn't care. If they knew then they had outside knowledge. They could have also just not given any thought to the other hostages. I think the latter is the case. The fact that Harry did something extraordinary and was rewarded for it does not cast slurs on any of the others. Magpie: Why would they need outside knowledge to not assume child sacrifice is part of the game? You seem to be saying it doesn't cast any slurs on their character; they either had suspicious outside knowledge or they just didn't care about a bunch of people dying. Sounds like a slur to me, one I've never even heard suggested until this thread focusing on Harry's moral fibre points. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 02:00:02 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 02:00:02 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151976 > Alla: > > If you show me the canon that other champions knew for sure that > other hostages were not in danger then yes, I would agree with you > that they did not have to save other hostages. Magpie: > We have Ron laughing at the idea that Harry thought the hostages were in > danger, and also laughing at the idea that the judges decided it was showing > moral character. The merpeople, iirc, are laughing at Harry when he's trying > to save the other hostages. We've also got the fact that the hostages > weren't really in danger. Why should the other players have to prove they > weren't completely confused about what was going on just because Harry was? Alla: Ron is not a Champion though and neither is a Hermione. IMO it is very logical to assume that hostages were warned that they were not really in danger by Dumbledore or whoever, but champions were not. IMO to support that champions did not know, we have Fleur reaction to Harry's saving her sister. It is not " thanks for nothing, she was not really in danger". It is: "Meanwhile Madame Maxime was trying to restrain Fleur Delacour, who was quite hysterical, fighting tooth and nail to return to the water. "Gabrielle!Gabrielle! Is she alive? Is she 'urt?" - GoF, paperback, p.504. I don't think she would have been HYSTERICAL if she did not think Gabrielle was in real danger. IMO of course. And of course we have Fleur enthusiastic gratitude to Harry ( you saved her even though she was not her hostage) > Magpie: >> Now Cedric and Krum are under suspicion of seeing people in danger and not > doing anything to help them because they only cared about getting points in > a game. That's a completely unfair slur on their character--and a pretty > huge slur it is, too. Does Cedric Diggory really seem like the kind of guy > who would not care about a little girl's life because he only cares about > winning? Isn't this the same kid who gave Harry the hint about the egg > because he thought it would only be fair? Alla: Well, they DID care about getting points in the game, didn't they? Cedric is a great kid. great kids make mistakes too. Harry certainly makes plenty. I think that it is even better that I can view Cedric as not all together perfect, but someone who become a bit too involved in the game at that point OR of course maybe he did knew that hostages were not in danger. And yes, he helped Harry after Harry helped him. They certainly helped each other plenty, poor guys. Cedric knows what fair play is, but I do think that it is totally possible that in this task he lost to Harry on "moral fiber" part of evaluation. Does not make him a bad person to me at all. Stupid Yahoomort will not let us edit the posts of course, so I am editing by replying to myself. I am flipping through the "Second task" chapter and I think I found a support for Cedric simply concentrating on the game too much. Cedric was IMO simply too stressed out by the time he got to the hostages to think about anything else except saving Cho. "Got lost!" he mouthed, looking panick stricken. "Fleur and Krumm coming now" - GoF, p.300. Cedric is already panicking since he had trouble getting to them. I think it is perfectly reasonable that he would not think of making sure that everybody else got their hostages. But Harry DID think of that, he went the extra-mile and IMO was rewarded for that. JMO, Alla From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 02:08:29 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 02:08:29 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: <010801c67238$8212e810$3166400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151977 > >>Magpie: > > > > Now Cedric and Krum are under suspicion of seeing people in > > danger and not doing anything to help them because they only > > cared about getting points in a game. That's a completely > > unfair slur on their character--and a pretty huge slur it is, > > too. > > > >>Alla: > Well, they DID care about getting points in the game, didn't they? > Cedric is a great kid. great kids make mistakes too. > Betsy Hp: I'm not sure a boy whose willing to let other people die just so he can win a game can be described as a "great kid". Sounds like a raging psycopath to me. Cedric is seventeen years old, I believe. He's old enough to be considered intelligent and responsible, I think. If he thought the other hostages would die if they weren't saved by their champions than he willfully decided that their deaths were okay as long as he got some glory. Does that honestly fit in with the Cedric Diggory of canon? Fleur and Harry were both equally panicked about this task. Both Cedric and Krum were calm. The judges decided (for whatever reason) that panic is better, has more moral fiber, than calm. Which, actually fits in with how the WW does things. But it don't impress me much. > >>Alla: > > Cedric knows what fair play is, but I do think that it is totally > possible that in this task he lost to Harry on "moral fiber" part > of evaluation. > Does not make him a bad person to me at all. Betsy Hp: For me, if Cedric was willing to trade the lives of three children to win a game, he's a monster. It's the sort of call Voldemort would make. > >>Joe: > > A teenaged boy put aside competion and glory to help someone he > had never met and we are discussing if he has been given an unfair > advantage. > Betsy Hp: No. Harry put aside competion and glory and received, well, the competion and glory. Which means he didn't sacrifice anything. Which means his noble "sacrifice", wasn't much of either. Compare that with Richard Gere's character in the movie, "An Officer and a Gentleman". [SPOILERS FOR THE MOVIE "AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN"] In Officer training, Richard Gere and his fellow trainies run a difficult obstacle course as part of their training. One of Gere's classmates has a particularly hard time at it, but Gere hits it hard. There's a possibility he'll break the school record. So they're down to their final bit in the training and it's make or break time. The course needs to be completed, within a certain time IIRC, or they're out of the program. Gere is blowing through the course, he's got it made, but his fellow student is struggling, badly. Gere makes a decision to go back and talk the other student through the course. So much for his breaking the record. But when the two of them cross the finish line, their trainer (Louis Gossett, Jr.) is looking at Gere with tons of approval. He may not have broken the school record, but he proved himself an officer and a gentlemen. (The audience cheers.) *That's* noble sacrifice. *That's* proving your worth. And no, Gere doesn't get put on the books. He chose to sacrifice his personal glory to help another. [END SPOILER] Harry *tries* to do a similar move. But the judges don't let him. They turn it into a gimmick, a way for Harry to gain *points* of all the crass things. By making it a way to curry favor they make the favor recieved bigger than the sacrifice made. A proud nod from Dumbledore as Cedric took the lead would have meant much, much more. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > I'd also add that good sportsmanship is supposed to be it's *own* > > reward. That's the whole point. That's why I think the actions > > of the judges actually *cheapened* Harry's decision. They > > turned it into a question of winning or losing, when good > > sportsmanship should be above such petty things. "It's not > > whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game" is not > > empty rhetoric. And one shouldn't do humanitarian things for > > the reward. > >>Pippin: > Huh? So they should stop awarding the Nobel Peace Prize because > it's unfair to other humanitarians? > Betsy Hp: Well, first off, the Nobel Peace Prize is not a sporting event. And second off, people do not put their names in and then openingly compete for the honor. Or at least, they're not supposed to be seen as doing so. Other folks look around and pick some deserving person out of the crowd. (Unless you're suggesting Ghandi was gunning for a Nobel Peace Prize when he choice his life work?) But this actually goes to my point. (Or Steve's point actually, but one I agree with.) The Triwizard Tournement is not a sporting event. It's a political one. The Champions are pawns, the games are all fixed, and popularity is more important than skill. It's as corrupt as the WW. Sportsmanship need not apply. Betsy Hp From gelite67 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 02:13:36 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 02:13:36 -0000 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: <20060507172107.71440.qmail@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151978 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Brianna Kinney wrote: > > gelite67 wrote: > > I'm not saying Hermione's unnattractive. I just don't know if she > believes she is attractive, which would affect her self esteem, > especially since Ron is so obviously attracted to Fleur, who is > apparently quite fetching. :) > > There also seems a stark contrast to me between the way Fleur and > Ginny are described, compared to Hermione -- like JKR goes out of > her way to point out that Hermione may not be "conventionally" > pretty. And don't get me wrong. I think that's a great message for > young girls, most of whom are not like Fleur and Ginny. > > BK here: > > Coming out of lurkdom to add my two cents. I like the phrase JKR uses that Hermione isn't "conventionally" pretty. Angie here: A quick clarification and an apology. I didn't mean to make it sound as if I was quoting JKR, and that JKR said that Hermione wasn't "conventionally" pretty. I only meant that JKR seems to go out of her way to describe Hermione in a way that, to me, would mean she was not conventionally pretty - for example, bushy hair, large teeth. I don't know if JKR has spoken on the subject. Sorry if I led anyone astray. From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 8 02:16:07 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 22:16:07 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sportsmanship/legitimacy References: Message-ID: <012601c67245$5e5fbbc0$3166400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 151979 Alla: Well, they DID care about getting points in the game, didn't they? Magpie: Of course they cared about getting points in the game--so did Harry. But that they hold getting points in the game over the lives of innocent people is a slur I don't think is fair to just assume they deserve because there's no story of them saving all the hostages. Alla: Cedric is a great kid. great kids make mistakes too. I think that it is even better that I can view Cedric as not all together perfect, but someone who become a bit too involved in the game at that point OR of course maybe he did knew that hostages were not in danger. Magpie: If you assume he thought the hostages were in danger then I think you've gone far past a kid who's too involved in a game. You've just said he made the choice to leave people to die because he had a medal to win. I don't think we ought to be having to make excuses for Cedric as if he didn't live up to Harry's great example, which was a mistake I believe Harry himself, in retrospect, feels stupid for making (though Harry has good reason for personally thinking along these lines in ways Cedric doesn't). There's no reason this question of people dying ever had to have entered anyone's mind. Alla: And yes, he helped Harry after Harry helped him. They certainly helped each other plenty, poor guys. Magpie: So if he's willing to help his rival, be a good sport about sharing the championship, doesn't feel right taking credit for winning a Quidditch game when the other Seeker's unconscious and iirc would have let Harry take the cup alone. Where is Cedric the cold-blooded psycho who would let a child die because he got too involved in his points? Alla: Cedric knows what fair play is, but I do think that it is totally possible that in this task he lost to Harry on "moral fiber" part of evaluation. Magpie: Which is proving what's unfair about Harry's moral fibre evaluation. Canonically this is a test of courage whether or not you can get your "prize" away from the merpeople and back to shore. Harry is wrong in thinking there are lives at stake and comes in last because of that. Now, in order to defend the points he's given a shadow has to be cast on Cedric's character. Suddenly he's the guy who doesn't care if people die. Alla: Does not make him a bad person to me at all. Magpie: It makes him a far worse person than Harry and a person who would let someone die if saving them would interfere with his winning a race, which is not something he deserves to be called, imo, just for participating in a contest as expected. Cedric not thinking of everyone else getting their hostages says nothing about his character *unless* he thinks those hostages will die if they aren't saved. Then it says he's kinda crazy. -m 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 zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon May 8 02:20:01 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 02:20:01 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151981 > Betsy Hp: > So, yeah, Ginny dated boys she wasn't in love with. I don't think > that's the same thing as prostitution. And I also don't think she > purposefully chose boys that would annoy Harry (unlike Hermione) so > I don't see Ginny as being coldly calculating. She just attempted > to live like Harry wasn't important. It was dishonest but not > horrible. > zgirnius: I find even dishonest too strong a word, I'd call it 'realistic' or 'practical'. Ginny is not aware of the fact that she is a character in a series of books, and that she will inevitably end up with Harry, their hero, because she is the author's perfect girl for him. In other words, she has to face the possibility that Harry will NEVER be interested in her in that way. Should she pine for the rest of her life, to stay 'honest'? She has already waited what, three years, by the end of GoF? (I think she and Neville went to the Yule Ball 'as friends'.) A very long time, for a preteen/teenager. At a certain point, you just have to live your life. Dating others is a healthy step in the direction of trying to 'get over it'. (I'm thinking of advice given to widowed spouses grieving for their loved ones. While they are even more unattainable, obviously, I think the same principle holds. After a certain point, part of getting on with one's life is getting back to living it fully, even if one still feels one will never be able to feel the same about anyone but the deceased.) If Harry does come around before then, great. And if not, perhaps one boyfriend or the next, will turn into something more 'serious'. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 02:22:23 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 02:22:23 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151982 > > >>Alla: > > Well, they DID care about getting points in the game, didn't they? > > Cedric is a great kid. great kids make mistakes too. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I'm not sure a boy whose willing to let other people die just so he > can win a game can be described as a "great kid". Sounds like a > raging psycopath to me. Cedric is seventeen years old, I believe. > He's old enough to be considered intelligent and responsible, I > think. If he thought the other hostages would die if they weren't > saved by their champions than he willfully decided that their deaths > were okay as long as he got some glory. Does that honestly fit in > with the Cedric Diggory of canon? Alla: No, Cedric you described of course does not fit with Cedric of canon. Cedric who may have known that hostages were not in danger or Cedric who did not KNOW that Fleur was out of competition and that is why he did not think of saving Gabrielle does to me fit with canon Cedric. See quote I brought in my previous post. Cedric says to Harry that Fleur and Krum are coming. Betsy Hp: > Fleur and Harry were both equally panicked about this task. Both > Cedric and Krum were calm. The judges decided (for whatever reason) > that panic is better, has more moral fiber, than calm. Which, > actually fits in with how the WW does things. But it don't impress > me much. Alla: I am afraid I honestly don't follow your line of reasoning here. Judges decided that panic was better than calm? How does that describe what happened at all? You mean that panicking champions won? Well, Fleur took the last place. Cedric in the quote I brought was panick stricken too. So, out of three panicking champions extra points were awarded to the one who everything being equal, saved the extra hostage. I thought judges decided that the champion who saves the extra person is better than those who don't because of showing his character, which if I may say again at the risk of being a parrot for all we know IS a part of evaluation. > Magpie: There's no > reason this question of people dying ever had to have entered anyone's mind. > Alla: Yes, it was. It certainly looked to me as it entered Fleur's mind. See the quote of her reaction I brought upthread. JMO, Alla From siskiou at vcem.com Mon May 8 02:54:21 2006 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 19:54:21 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: References: <20060507172107.71440.qmail@web34508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1981220452.20060507195421@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151983 Hi, Sunday, May 7, 2006, 7:13:36 PM, gelite67 wrote: > A quick clarification and an apology. I didn't mean to make it sound > as if I was quoting JKR, and that JKR said that Hermione wasn't > "conventionally" pretty. She actually calls her "plain" in several interviews and that her studying and needing to be number one academically is her way to make up for her perceived lack of attractiveness. JKR said she felt the same until age 16, when she discovered make up. For example this interview: http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/0999-slj-feldman.htm Hermione is loosely based on me. She's a caricature of me when I was 11, which I'm not particularly proud of. She's quite annoying in a lot of ways. I like her as a character, but I'm very aware that some people wouldn't. I know girls who are a lot like Hermione--endearing and pesky at the same time. I've met a lot of girls who say they recognize themselves in Hermione. I think it's a very female way of coping, to try and be the best. Hermione is a character I understand really, really well. I consciously try to make it clear that underneath the aggravating surface is someone who is actually quite insecure, hence her constant struggle to be the best. I think boy readers can grudgingly see the point of Hermione. Girls tend to identify with her a lot more. It probably is a particularly female characteristic for young girls to cover up their insecurities about feeling plain, or whatever inadequacy, by trying to get the best marks. Hermione will loosen up a lot. In fact she does loosen up a lot in Chamber of Secrets--as I did as I got older. Another interview here: http://www.angelfire.com/mi3/cookarama/telegrfukjul99.html Joanne Kathleen (aka J.K.) Rowling is pretty with blue eyes and long hair, but when she was young, she says, she was just like Harry's friend Hermione -- very plain and the school swot [nerd]. "I loosened up a lot at 16 when I discovered makeup," she tells me. "I realized the star at the bottom of your homework wasn't everything. I still worked hard though." I could go on, but all the talk about Hermione is very similar. :) So, no, I don't think Hermione is supposed to be a beauty and I'm very happy about that, because there is too much of this idea that she just "has to be beautiful" going around. As if only people with physical beauty are worthy... -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 02:39:54 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 02:39:54 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > With apologies to Geoff and to anyone else who's tired of discussing > Snape, I can't get the man out of my mind. I know perfectly well > that he's a fictional character, but I worry and wonder about him > as if he were real and feel thwarted because I can't do anything > about the predicament he has landed himself in. (I'm not worried > about Harry; he'll suffer, but he'll triumph in the end. Maybe even > grow up emotionally as well as legally, since the book is IMO as > much a bildungsroman as a heroic quest. But Snape's fate, like his > loyalties, is much less cut and dried.) Oh, I don't know that Snape's ultimate fate is in much doubt. I, at least, don't see any way he can still be alive at the end, no matter what his loyalties are. What would be the point? Snape's entire character is oriented toward the past and the questions arising from the past. Once those questions are answered, and those issues settled, he will have no purpose. He will in effect be in a world where there is no place for him. > > Carol, knowing that it's silly to worry about a fictional character > whose fate and redemption are outside her control but concerned for > Snape's soul nonetheless Oh, it isn't silly. Worrying about Snape is a lot more worthwile than any number of things -- running for Congress, for instance. But Snape's soul has a lot of cleansing to run through. There is his tie with Voldemort, the situation atop the tower, his betrayal of the Potters, and of course his reprehensible abuse of Harry and Neville, which must, IMO, be very specifically addressed (and for which Snape must be very specifically and severely punished, and for which an explanation of Dumbledore's reprehensible failure to intervene must be provided) if JKR is not to reveal herself as a very poor writer indeed and guilty of authoring a series that speaks approvingly of the abuse of children. Lupinlore From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 8 06:54:09 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 06:54:09 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Alla: > > > Well, they DID care about getting points in the game, didn't > they? Geoff: Actually, the silly thing about this is that the points are basically irrelevant. The only place where they seem to have a bearing on the Tournament is the order in which competitors go into the maze. The requirements for getting through are that they get their egg in the first task so that they acquire the clue for the second task and the second task just creates an order of batting for the third task. Fleur doesn't complete the underwater task but isn't disqualified..... I can see that the question of fairness is at the back of everyone's thinking but, in reality, the points are a bit of a non-event. a_svirn: > For one thing Dumbledore could have an inkling that something of > that nature might happen, since he was so adept in "reading the > signs". For another what is the reason d'?tre of the binding > contracts? Except for providing an excellent opportunity for > cheating I can think of any. Geoff: Is the raison d'?tre of the contract really to 'legalise' cheating? I would assume that this is part of the original structure of the Tournament dating from the 13th century and probably one of the few fixed rules. as I imagine the tasks would vary from competition to competition. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Mon May 8 07:53:55 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 00:53:55 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40605080053s54ee482bm2ce9f07eacf0ef50@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151986 On 5/6/06, Randy wrote: > > If you want to learn more about Heroes in classical and medieval > tradition look at > > http://www.fellowshipofreason.com/archives/4heroes.htm > > The things that stand out in the summary are quite interesting.. > > ... > > "He has a fatal flaw" I think Snape is flawed. > > > "The suffering of the character is physical" Snape has obviously > suffered and will suffer more in Book 7. > > > "Death must occur in an unusual way" I predict that Snape dies in > Book 7. > > > "The hero fights for his own honor, his deeds belong to the community > only after his death." Snape will somehow save the day or die trying. > > > Harry represents the Medieval Hero. He was born a commoner. (Or at > least raised as one.) > > He remains loyal to his master, Dumbledore. He has learned humility, > obedience (loyalty), generosity, willingness to act, acceptance, > restraint, temperance, and sacrifice. > > He will wage war with Voldemort on behalf of his Lord's (Dumbledore's) > principals. > > ... > By the way, did anyone notice my fun with words? > > Humility > Obedience > Generosity > Willingness > Acceptance of his duties > Restraint > Temperance > Sacrifice > Kemper now: That's cool... I didn't notice ;-) But I also didn't notice where Snape has obviously suffered physically. Maybe emotionally. Maybe. Snape does have many flaws, but what do you think his fatal flaw will be? Assuming Snape dies, my vote is pride. For the life of me, I can't think of a classical story where the fatal flaw was something else... like gluttony. What way do you think he might die unusually? I hope its not being AK'd or turned inside out. If Snape destroyed an Horcrux, would he do so for his honor or for the community? After I typed that last sentence, I answered it for myself: his honor. Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon May 8 09:35:57 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 09:35:57 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151987 bboyminn: On a final note, Fleur who failed completely was STILL given 25 points. Maybe we should consider her 25 points cheating. Why should she be given any points for failing the task? Why should she get what we might metaphorically consider a 'do over'? Also, note that Madam Maxime awarded Harry full points even though that hurt her own champion. Certainly, if she felt it was unfair or against the rules, she would have deducted points or protested. a_svirn: On the contrary, it did *not* hurt her champion. Fleur failed the task altogether, so Harry's points for fiber did not affect her standing. They only affected Cedric's and Krum's standing. But now, come to think of it, I can't help but wondering whether Fleur's "do over" has anything to do with the fact that M-me Maxime went along with the Dumbledore's suggestion to reward Harry for his fiber. Alla: If you show me the canon that other champions knew for sure that other hostages were not in danger then yes, I would agree with you that they did not have to save other hostages. Otherwise, I disagree, I don't think that Cedric and Victor deliberately bandoned the hostages, they just were concentrated on the "GAME" and IMO did not look at the big picture. a_svirn: And what *is* the big picture in question? Does it feature Dumbledore devising a task that can result in death of four children, should champions prove to be too slow in saving them? Alla: For not thinking that the girl can DIE and they can prevent it. It is NOT a crime at all a_svirn: Is it not? I'd say it is. Alla: No, I meant to say that we know for a fact that people DIED in TWT in the past and how can we exclude a possibility that one of the tasks can include the danger for the hostages too not just for the contestants. a_svirn: We'll just have to assume that Dumbledore would not knowingly risk the lives of children entrusted to his care (and that includes the contestants too). Not too much to expect from a headmaster, wouldn't you think so? Of course, 13th century they could have had other standards, but that's Dumbledore after all, the Best of the Good Guys. Alla: Does not make him a bad person to me at all. Magpie: It makes him a far worse person than Harry and a person who would let someone die if saving them would interfere with his winning a race, which is not something he deserves to be called, imo, just for participating in a contest as expected. Cedric not thinking of everyone else getting their hostages says nothing about his character *unless* he thinks those hostages will die if they aren't saved. Then it says he's kinda crazy. a_svirn: Not just crazy. That makes him no better than Voldemort in the moral fiber department. Because it means that he would walk on any number of dead bodies if there is a prospect of glory. And since we know that that it is far from true, where does it leave Dumbledore and his fiber? He might not stoop so low as to make child sacrifice part of the game, but he does stop just short of character assassination in order to cheer up his favourite student. Geoff: Is the raison d'?tre of the contract really to 'legalise' cheating? a_svirn: Is it not? It makes you a hostage, completely at the mercy of, well, everyone, and fist and foremost of the jury. And it is a one-sided bargain. You are the only one who has any obligations. The jury has none. That's making mockery out of the idea of rules and fairness. Besides, what *is* the reason d'etre then? The drawbacks are obvious; what are the advantages? Geoff: I would assume that this is part of the original structure of the Tournament dating from the 13th century and probably one of the few fixed rules. as I imagine the tasks would vary from competition to competition. a_svirn: So what if it is part of the original structure? And what does it mean "fixed rules"? Why cannot they be "unfixed" if they are so patently bad? From inufan_625 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 10:24:29 2006 From: inufan_625 at yahoo.com (inufan_625) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 10:24:29 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151988 Ceridwen: She took Hermione's advice, never giving up, she'd always hoped... to finally snag Harry in the end. And I read that last pause before 'myself' as a hesitation because she doesn't quite believe she's been herself until she got with Harry. So, I do see Ginny's dating other boys when she has never given up on being with Harry as something cold and calculating, designed to get Harry's attention. I'm sure other people see it differently. But this is the way I see it. It makes me think more about Ginny now. Will there be problems with her following other people? TR in CoS, Hermione for apparently several years for her love life (and is Hermione the best person to give love advice?). Inufan625: This assessment while both common and in a way understandable seems completely unfair to me, particularly the Ginny as a 'cold and calculating' person. If Ginny is to be faulted for going out with Micheal and Dean then you must place the same title upon Hermione for accepting a date with McClaggen. It is made more than clear that she only chooses him because she knew he was the best canidate to use in her attempt to upset Ron. Then you must also say the same about Ron himself who clearly only went out with Lavender because he was upset about Hermione and Krum. By your standards Harry is the only one who is not cold and calculating when it comes to dating. What's more how are we to know that Ginny was not sincere in her attempt to get over Harry. Her addmission at the funeral is nothing more than that it didn't work, that she continued to like him in spite of her attempts to move past her crush. Maybe Hermione isn't the best to consult for love advise considering the state of her own 'house' but she is one of Harry's best friends. Her advise for Ginny to be herself was right on, it was how they planned for her to go about accomplishing that which was faulty. Honestly I don't see why people give Ginny such a hard time. She is a 14-15 yo girl, full of hormones and despite outward appearances she also has her insecurities. Yes she often acts rashly and with great temper and yes sometimes her jokes are a bit unkind and her actions not what one would call acceptable, but every character in the books has had moment like those. Luna even remarks that Ron can be unkind. From minluko at yahoo.com Mon May 8 04:32:04 2006 From: minluko at yahoo.com (minluko) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 04:32:04 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151989 > Carol: > With apologies to Geoff and to anyone else who's tired of discussing >Snape, I can't get the man out of my mind. Hey, you are not alone! I also think that Snape is the most fascinating character in the book. Can't have enough of him, can we? I mean as a character, not as a person, of course. > Carol: > Voldemort will expect him to show his >loyalty by participating in the various raids and other DE >activities, >maybe even commit some murders on his own. I only hope that Snape is too valuable to LV to waste his talents on such trivial tasks as killing Ministry workers and OotP members. My guess is: now that Snape has proven himself to LV, he might get Crouch Jr.'s job! He will be in charge of the operation "Get Potter"! He'll be ordered to devise some plan to get hold of Harry, so that LV could finally kill him. It would be logical for LV to entrust Snape with this task, because of all the DE he knows Harry the best. This assignment can give Snape some freedom of maneuver (if he is still on our side, and I believe he is). It would be a dangerous game, but with his cunning and use of Occlumency Snape has a chance to mislead LV for a while, giving Harry some time to search for Horcruxes (I'm not sure Snape knows about Horcruxas, but he might). Snape won't have much time for games though. LV would want to finish with Harry as soon as possible, because after his death most of the wizarding world would be too demoralized to resist. It is also a matter of principle for LV. He needs to prove to everybody and to himself that he is invincible. minluko From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Mon May 8 13:29:27 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 13:29:27 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151990 Inufan625: > If Ginny is to be faulted for going out with Micheal and Dean then you > must place the same title upon Hermione for accepting a date with > McClaggen. It is made more than clear that she only chooses him because > she knew he was the best canidate to use in her attempt to upset Ron. > Then you must also say the same about Ron himself who clearly only > went out with Lavender because he was upset about Hermione and Krum. Ceridwen: I'm not so sure that Ron only went out with Lavender because he was upset about the Krum kiss. She apparently flattered him, and most people can be swayed, at least for a little while, by goo-goo eyes and complete worship. But, for Hermione, yes, I do think she was getting back at Ron and had no feelings for McClaggen, which is definitely cold and calculating. Inufan625: > By your standards Harry is the only one who is not cold and calculating > when it comes to dating. What's more how are we to know that Ginny > was not sincere in her attempt to get over Harry. Her addmission at > the funeral is nothing more than that it didn't work, that she > continued to like him in spite of her attempts to move past her crush. Ceridwen: Ginny didn't say she was trying to move past her crush. She says she never gave up hoping for him. *(snip)* > Honestly I don't see why people give Ginny such a hard time. She is a 14-15 yo girl, full of hormones and despite outward appearances she > also has her insecurities. Yes she often acts rashly and with great > temper and yes sometimes her jokes are a bit unkind and her actions > not what one would call acceptable, but every character in the books > has had moment like those. Luna even remarks that Ron can be unkind. Ceridwen: I think Ginny acted like a lot of girls I went to high school with. There was plenty of settling for lesser guys because the object of affections was with someone else, or hadn't noticed the hopeful girl was alive. And Hermione's advice sounded eerily like the advice my mother and my friends' mothers used to give. Though I think Hermione didn't mean for Ginny to really forget about Harry and find solace with someone else, as mothers tend to do. As you said in the part I snipped, it was their plan - a plot, a scheme, a contrivance - to make Harry notice her in the end. While it's something I can visualize a 15 year old girl doing, it still isn't nice. The girls who do these sorts of things aren't mean girls ordinarily, and they'd probably be surprised if you told them they were being mean. But is it really nice to the guys they're dating? No, not dating, going steady with. Seeing. Exclusively. As for Hermione, she was worse. It was a one-shot deal, thanks for the evening, sucker. And even she probably didn't think about how McClaggen would take it, any more than she thought about how the centaurs would like being used as weapons against Umbridge. But we weren't talking about Hermione. If Hermione jumps off a cliff, should Ginny do the same before we can talk about the character and the part of the plot built around her? Ceridwen. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 8 13:59:55 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 13:59:55 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151991 > a_svirn: > And what *is* the big picture in question? Does it feature > Dumbledore devising a task that can result in death of four > children, should champions prove to be too slow in saving them? Pippin: I see my old friend the excluded middle has raised its bifurcated head. When I go to pick up my child from school, I am not showing callous disregard for their safety by not picking up the other children, neither am I unaware that they might be in trouble if they aren't picked up. What I am doing is assuming that if there is a problem with one of the other children, someone else will be available to deal with it. That is a reasonable assumption in civilized times, and it is the one which Krum and Diggory make, IMO. But Harry has never known civilized times. He has suffered grievously from the assumption that if there is anything wrong someone else will take care of it, and he does not make that assumption himself. >From his point of view and from the point of view of anyone who believed there was a malign agency interfering with the conduct of the tournament, making sure that all the hostages were rescued was the right thing to do and an example of international magical cooperation which is what the tournament is supposed to be about. As Hermione says, it's not supposed to be about *winning*. Did the judges make it about winning by awarding Harry points for moral fiber? Only if you think it's about who gets the most points. :) > Geoff: > Is the raison d'?tre of the contract really to 'legalise' cheating? > > a_svirn: > Is it not? It makes you a hostage, completely at the mercy of, well, > everyone, and fist and foremost of the jury. And it is a one-sided > bargain. You are the only one who has any obligations. The jury has > none. That's making mockery out of the idea of rules and fairness. > Besides, what *is* the reason d'etre then? The drawbacks are > obvious; what are the advantages? Pippin: Well, to be honest, the raison d'etre is a plot device. But one can imagine that in the past, a school tried to avoid the disgrace of losing by claiming that they had never meant to enter in the first place, or more likely, someone attempted a win by confunding all the other candidates into withdrawing. Whatever. But the judges *are* obligated to hold the contest and award the thousand galleons once the goblet has made its choice. I don't see them calling the whole thing off. Karkaroff threatens to withdraw and is told that he can't leave his champion -- "binding magical contract". > > Geoff: > I would assume that this is part of the original structure of the > Tournament > dating from the 13th century and probably one of the few fixed rules. > as I imagine the tasks would vary from competition to competition. > > a_svirn: > So what if it is part of the original structure? And what does it > mean "fixed rules"? Why cannot they be "unfixed" if they are so > patently bad? Pippin: They weren't patently bad. Evidently no one had ever managed to tamper with the Goblet before. Dumbledore obviously thought it there would be no reason for Voldemort to interfere with the contest because Harry wouldn't be competing in it. But the loopy plans of a megalomaniac like Voldie are hard to figure -- they're not the sort of things a sane person would attempt. I mean, a sensible person would have serious doubts about whether an object that had never been tampered with before could be confunded, and about whether even a brilliant actor could successfully carry on an impersonation for months. But sensible is not Tom Riddle's middle name. Even when Harry's name emerged it still wasn't obvious to most people that there was outside influence involved, because (as we learn in HBP) many people thought Harry Potter could do magic far beyond what any fourth year should be capable of. Certainly Karkaroff, as an ex-DE, would think so. As for getting rid of the Goblet, it wouldn't be the TWT without it. That would be like getting rid of the Oscar statuette. There are loads of other film awards, but none of them have that legendary status. It was the chance to be part of a legend that inspired people to work together despite all their differences to bring the tournament about. Lastly, as someone who's lived in a very small town and in a very big city, I've observed that cheating works a little differently in a small community than it does in a huge impersonal metropolitan society. When everybody knows everybody else, there's a kind of tolerance --Slytherin gets to cheat as much as it does at Quidditch partly because everybody knows there's a point beyond which they won't go. Everybody knows Slytherin is going to cheat, but everybody also knows they're not going to cheat so much that nobody wants to play against them any more. It's the same with the TWT. Everybody knows there's going to be cheating, but everyone trusts that it won't go so far that it makes a mockery of the whole thing or be so obvious that it can't be ignored. Nobody wants an asterisk next to their name in the record book. The danger is, of course, that someone who doesn't care about the reputation of the game or their future as a member of the community can take advantage of that tolerance, and that is exactly what CrouchJr did. Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 8 14:06:07 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 14:06:07 -0000 Subject: JKR and the Girl Guides Interview Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151992 As a Girl Scout mom (USA) I'm very excited that JKR participated in a Girl Guides (Scotland) interview. (I'm valiantly trying to avoid my "Scouting is Great for Kids" soapbox here.) She answered a couple of questions specific to the HP books. I don't know who asked the questions, or for that matter, what other women were included. Here's the link: http://www.girlguidingscotland.org.uk/information/info_interview_rowli ng.htm#on One question was about Jane Austen: >>>>What is it about Jane Austen's writing that you admire? If you could have met her - what would you ask her? snipping answer: Praise of her writing rarely conveys its extraordinary quality, but I think her characters are vividly alive, she had a wonderful facility for dialogue, a dry and sometimes scathing sense of humour and she crafted seamless plots with such lightness of touch it appears effortless. And speaking as someone who loves to pull the wool over her readers' eyes, nobody has ever bettered the twist Austen managed in 'Emma' (I won't give it away in case you haven't read it).<<<< I'm not at all saying JKR is up to Jane Austen's level, but her descriptions of JA reminded me of her own style. (Not that it's never been mentioned before.) So, does anyone think JKR's characters are vividly alive; does she display a scthing sense of humor ("Oops!" anyone?); and what do you think of "loves to pull the wool over her readers' eyes."? Scouting Moms want to know. Potioncat From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 8 14:23:55 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 14:23:55 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151993 > In another thread Snape is offered up as a hero type. I know Harry as > hero of a genre (with the genre being in dispute) has come up. But has > anyone ever considered that we might end up with several literary types > of heroes? > > Is the series big enough for that? > Pippin: It's long been a pet theory of mine that we have three literary types of heroes in HP. We have Harry, the epic hero. Epic heroes defend a nation or a culture from an external threat, they exemplify all of its virtues, they are of good family and high social standing (though at the beginning of the story they may have become displaced), their true loves recognize their virtue from the beginning and never seriously consider anyone else, and the love interest is a secondary plot line and may not exist at all. We have Ron, the romantic hero. Romantic heroes start at the bottom of the social heap, the threats they face are internal to their society, and by defeating them the hero rises to achieve fame, fortune and true love. Their love interest is likely to despise them at first and proving themselves in order to win her is a primary plot line. Then we have Snape, the anti-hero. Anti-heroes fly in the face of *almost* everything that heroes stand for -- they will never be held up as an example to small children, they seek no social good and obey only their own internal code of conduct, their love interests betray them, they usually have a mysterious past that turns out to be shady or criminal, they are dishonest, cynical and disillusioned. They don't resemble heroes in any way -- except that when their internal code demands it, they will risk everything to save a weak or innocent person from harm. Pippin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon May 8 15:05:19 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 15:05:19 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151994 a_svirn: > > And what *is* the big picture in question? Does it feature > > Dumbledore devising a task that can result in death of four > > children, should champions prove to be too slow in saving them? Pippin: > I see my old friend the excluded middle has raised its bifurcated > head. When I go to pick up my child from school, I am not showing > callous disregard for their safety by not picking up the other > children, neither am I unaware that they might be in trouble > if they aren't picked up. What I am doing is assuming that if there > is a problem with one of the other children, someone else will be > available to deal with it. That is a reasonable assumption in > civilized times, and it is the one which Krum and Diggory make, IMO. SSSusan: YES. This is sort of how I'm thinking of it, too, Pippin. ASSUMPTIONS are such a big part of all of this, and we, alas, can't be certain what those assumptions were for each champion. Certainly, what Pippin's said here about "reasonable assumptions in civilized times" seems... well... reasonable. We do also have a few clues, such as Fleur's "hysterical" reaction (she clearly assumed the hostages were in real danger). As for Cedric, I keep thinking back to the canon Alla provided in 151976, and I think it points to a what I think is a very important assumption that Cedric made: "Got lost!" he [Cedric] mouthed, looking panic stricken. "Fleur and Krum coming now" - GoF, p.300. SSSusan again: To me it's not an issue of Cedric not *caring* about the other hostages; it's that he thought they were all *taken care of!* If Harry's already there, and if Cedric saw Fleur & Krum coming, then in Cedric's mind, when/if the question of everyone's safety even popped up, the answer would have been: all hostages' rescues are imminent. True, Fleur ended up *not* making it, and true, Harry looked at it all differently than Cedric did from the start, but at that moment, Cedric believed everyone's rescuer was on his/her way. With that assumption, why NOT just grab Cho and go? Harry's got Ron... Fluer & Krum are on their way... he's got Cho... it's all good! Was that not reasonable?? Now as to why Harry saw things differently, Pippin said: > But Harry has never known civilized times. He has suffered > grievously from the assumption that if there is anything wrong > someone else will take care of it, and he does not make that > assumption himself. SSSusan: Yes, this *does* differentiate Harry from Cedric and Krum. Does it also mean that Cedric & Krum were "wrong" or monsters or displayed behavior on a par with Voldemort's if they didn't see things this way? No, it doesn't, imo. I think it's simply that the others: 1) somehow knew there was no real danger; OR 2) assumed (these being "civilized times") that the "overseers" had some magical means of bringing the hostages to the surface if they weren't rescued at the end of the hour; OR 3) as I'm proposing here for Cedric (don't know if it'd fit Krum), that they had *reason* to believe all hostages were being taken care of. Just my two knuts. Siriusly Snapey Susan From inufan_625 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 10:37:05 2006 From: inufan_625 at yahoo.com (inufan_625) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 10:37:05 -0000 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: <1981220452.20060507195421@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 151995 gelite said: And Ron and McGlaggen and Victor were obviously attracted to her, for whatever reasons. So really, she can't be all that shabby in the looks department. BK again: Hermione has a strong personality, loads of confidence, and a quick, agile mind. I think those things are attractive on their own. I really can't imagine Victor or Ron putting up with a pretty airhead--or in Ron's case, at least, not for long. Inufan_625: One of the reason Vikor was so interested in Hermione was because she wasn't like the shallow dimwitted girls that followed him around giggling and were attracted to his fame. Her intelligence and the fact that she didn't fall all over herself around him was a welcome change and very attractive. Angie here: I only meant that JKR seems to go out of her way to describe Hermione in a way that, to me, would mean she was not conventionally pretty - for example, bushy hair, large teeth. I don't know if JKR has spoken on the subject. Sorry if I led anyone astray. Inufan_625: Just a small note but technically Hermione no longer has her 'large teeth' :) inufan_625 From winkadup at yahoo.com Mon May 8 12:38:49 2006 From: winkadup at yahoo.com (Wendy Dupuy) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 05:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060508123849.12017.qmail@web34110.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151996 Potioncat: It certainly doesn't seem that the Order members we saw expected anything like the Tower to happen. If anyone else did (Moody? Aberforth?) we'll have to wait to find out. winkadup: Were both Lily and James in the Order of the Phoenix? Maybe one of them saved Snape in some way, so he felt angry to do so but protect Harry. He would hate to owe them one. What do you think? winkadup From winkadup at yahoo.com Mon May 8 12:42:26 2006 From: winkadup at yahoo.com (Wendy Dupuy) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 05:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: <700201d40605080053s54ee482bm2ce9f07eacf0ef50@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060508124226.52724.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151997 Kemper: What way do you think he might die unusually? I hope it's not being AK'd or turned inside out. winkadup: Maybe he will die saving Harry, which would leave Harry in shock! winkadup From ldps at kaballero.com Mon May 8 13:14:21 2006 From: ldps at kaballero.com (Lazy Days) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 09:14:21 -0400 Subject: Snape-one of a kind (was Re: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero) References: <1146974226.3102.74992.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001b01c672a1$5282e910$360ba8c0@HP02272006> No: HPFGUIDX 151998 Randy wrote: "The classical hero, he is of royal birth or even... half mortal and half god." A Half blood Prince seems to fit the bill. "He must perform extraordinary feats" like fooling the Dark Lord. "He has a fatal flaw" I think Snape is flawed. "The suffering of the character is physical" Snape has obviously suffered and will suffer more in Book 7. "Death must occur in an unusual way" I predict that Snape dies in Book 7. "The hero fights for his own honor, his deeds belong to the community only after his death." Snape will somehow save the day or die trying. By the way, did anyone notice my fun with words? Humility Obedience Generosity Willingness Acceptance of his duties Restraint Temperance Sacrifice "Lazy Days": Two things about Snape: Can you guys imagine the lengths Snape must go through to exonerate himself in Harry's eyes? The eyes so remarkably like Lily's? And you know perfectly well that this is one of things like the Harry/LV confrontation which won't be revealed until the very end... Can anyone think of a character who is thought to be so evil, yet so tortured? The only one I can think of is Edgar, from King Lear, after his name is besmirched by Edmund, his brother. Even then, the level of internal strife is nowhere near Snape's... Also, the only proof that we have with Snape and the DADA position is that Dumbledore has said on several occasions that Snape wants it and also that Percy told Harry at his first-year feast... One last thing I saw with your nmemonic skill, Mr. Randy...- Was there an actual wizard named Hogwart, that the school was named after, or is everyone still banking on the fact that Hogwarts is an anagram of "Ghost War?" "Lazy Days" From winkadup at yahoo.com Mon May 8 17:01:32 2006 From: winkadup at yahoo.com (Wendy Dupuy) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 10:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Where will Harry live? Message-ID: <20060508170132.99630.qmail@web34113.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 151999 I have a question. At the end of the HBP, Harry said he would not return back to Hogwarts. I remember that Dumbledore asked the Dursleys if Harry may return once more until his birthday. Where will Harry go after that? Would he live in Sirius Black's family home? Didn't he inherit the house? Also what about the house of his Mother & Father? Any ideas? winkadup From lauciricad at yahoo.com Mon May 8 17:18:46 2006 From: lauciricad at yahoo.com (Don L.) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 17:18:46 -0000 Subject: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: <700201d40605080053s54ee482bm2ce9f07eacf0ef50@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152000 I agree that Snape will be a hero, albeit an anti-hero. Misunderstood, but part of a larger plan, that in the end, will force others, most notably Harry, to accept his part in the defeat of LV. Consider the LOTR's character Boromir. He, like Snape is an uncomfortable member of fellowship. He like Snape has a very difficult time accepting the reasoning and his part behind the goal of destroying the ring (think Lord Voldemort), ultimately leading him in the attempt to take the ring himself. Boromir quickly redeemed himself by protecting Pippin and Merry, dying in the process, and was loved by the remaining members as a hero, however flawed. Perhaps more importantly, by attempting to take the ring, his action broke the fellowship, a significant plot development. Snape like Boromir will play a key part, but unlike Boromir later in the story. His actions will move the story to it climatic sequence of events. Characters like Boromir and now Snape are important characters in plots particularly in the realm of fantasy. They are always driven by some personal flaw, greed, pride, past indiscretions, yet at a key point in the plot take on incredible risks, often sacrificing and redeeming themselves. This is the fate of Snape. IMO, his actions will play a key part in the destruction of LV, but his success could only have occurred with his perceived part in the death and sacrifice of Dumbledore. His part in Dumbledore's death will add to his conflicted character and will drive his actions. Until the end, Harry and the rest will misunderstood and doubt every thing Snape does, almost to their own ruin. Yet in the end Snape's actions and probable sacrifice while not decisive, will clear the path for Harry to defeat LV. It may well be the final scene where Harry realizes Snape's sacrifice and redemption rather than Harry's defeat of LV that most will find the most memorable and satisfying of book seven. "Don L." From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 8 19:19:27 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 19:19:27 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: <20060508123849.12017.qmail@web34110.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152001 > winkadup: > Were both Lily and James in the Order of the Phoenix? Maybe one of > them saved Snape in some way, so he felt angry to do so but protect > Harry. He would hate to owe them one. What do you think? Potioncat; Actually, yes, they were both in the Order during the first war with Voldemort. Whether either of them knew that Snape was helping the Order is unknown. And, yes, we're told Snape owes, or thinks he owes a Life Debt to James for saving him from the werewolf. He appears to have transferred the the debt to Harry.(SS/PS) Or then again, perhaps DD was misleading with a bit of the truth. From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon May 8 19:52:01 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 12:52:01 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape-one of a kind (was Re: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero) In-Reply-To: <001b01c672a1$5282e910$360ba8c0@HP02272006> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152002 "Lazy Days": Can anyone think of a character who is thought to be so evil, yet so tortured? The only one I can think of is Edgar, from King Lear, after his name is besmirched by Edmund, his brother. Even then, the level of internal strife is nowhere near Snape's... Sherry now: Can you show me any canon to support the idea that Snape is tortured inside? More than any other figure in literature? I don't mean, just your opinion, as it is shared by many in this group. But anywhere that we see the workings of his mind and heart and know he is tortured inside. We never see Snape inside. We never get into his head. Personally, I see a proud, cruel man, who revels in his cruelty. not tortured at all. lazy Days Also, the only proof that we have with Snape and the DADA position is that Dumbledore has said on several occasions that Snape wants it and also that Percy told Harry at his first-year feast... Sherry now: We also have Dumbledore's belief, the scene we saw in the Pensieve in HBP and Dumbledore believing Riddle cursed the position at the time he applied for the DADA position. Not proof, I grant you, but more than Percy's word. Unfortunately, I don't have my braille books, so I can't quote the relevant chapter and text. Sherry From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon May 8 20:54:45 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 20:54:45 -0000 Subject: second task points Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152004 I looked up the points for the second task. (GoF ch 26 Fleur: 25 points. Failed to retrieve hostage. Lauded by the judges for "excellent use of the bubble-head charm". Came back with scrapes and torn robes due to Grindielow attack. Wouldn't allow Mme Pomphrey to look after her. Thought she deserved 0 points. Cedric: 47 points. 1st to return, although 1 minute outside the time limit. Used bubble-head charm as well. Krum: 40 points. Second to return. Was also outside the time limit. Used transfiguration which the judges described as "incomplete..., but nevertheless effective." Harry: 45 points. Used gillyweed "to great effect". Was the last to return. Showed moral fibre by saving Gabriel. So far, this is canon. We now enter into speculation. I'm guessing here. Feel free to disagree. The numbers are definately haphazard, but I think the ideas behind them are fairly close to accurate, based on canon. Which leads us to...How Did They Judge? First they had to be able to breathe underwater. Fleur, Ced, and Harry were applauded by the judges. Krum received lesser praise, but was considered "effective". I will assume that there was at least 20 points awarded for figuring out how to breathe underwater. This may seem like a lot, but when you consider that they first had to decipher the egg clue in order to prepare, then it would seem that figuring out the egg is part of these points. I would guess that Fleur, Ced, and Harry all got those full points and Krum got just a bit less, but not much. Then they had to get the hostage. Fleur put up a fight, but failed. The others succeeded. If the first part was worth about 20, then maybe they gave Fleur 5 for her struggle against the grindielows. Or perhaps the first part was worth 25 and those were all the points she got. At any rate, she did succeed in part of the task, and so got only part of the points. Finally, they had to return within the time limit. None did. Harry would have been the only one to do so had he taken off immediately after freeing Ron. Ced was the closest, being 1 minute late, and was docked 3 points. I am assuming that the 3 points that he lost were due to being late as they had no other negative comments about him. Krum was later, but only received 40. Considering that he may have lost some for his incomplete transfiguration (which would only have been a very few, if any at all), I would say that his time caused most of the dockage. Harry did the first part well, battled the grindielows (I assume both of the other boys did as well as Harry) and got his hostage back to the surface. I assume Harry got full points for the first part and any that were given to the other boys for getting to the hostages. He also got points for returning with his hostage, as did the other guys, even though they were all outside of the time limit. If we assume that Krum lost, say 9 points for being late, and 1 point for his incomplete transfiguration (and that is only a guess- we know he lost 10 somewhere, but exactly where is certainly up to interpretation), then Harry, without "moral fibre" points would have probably gotten somewhere between 35 and 39. He ended up with 45, which means that about 6 to 10 points out of 45 were for moral fibre. It seems to me that Harry is getting bad press for being late, when, in fact, they were all late, if they arrived at all. I don't think in something this subjective, 6-10 points for moral fibre is that out of line. Had he not shown it, he would have arrived before the time was up. They had no negative comments about any other part of his performance, so he would probably have gotten the full 50. In other words, moral fibre cost him 5 points, but not the full 11-16 that being late would have cost him had he not had a good reason for being late. Again, this is all just speculation. Your mileage will probably vary greatly. Ginger, appologizing in advance for any math errors. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 8 21:25:28 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 21:25:28 -0000 Subject: Where will Harry live? In-Reply-To: <20060508170132.99630.qmail@web34113.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152005 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Wendy Dupuy wrote: > > I have a question. At the end of the HBP, Harry said he would not return back to Hogwarts. I remember that Dumbledore asked the Dursleys if Harry may return once more until his birthday. Where will Harry go after that? Would he live in Sirius Black's family home? Didn't he inherit the house? Also what about the house of his Mother & Father? Any ideas? > > winkadup Geoff: The house at Godric's Hollow was destroyed. Which leaves Grimmauld Place or possibly Harry might seek house room at somewhere such as The Burrow. He has already made comments about the former: ''You can keep using it as Headquarters," said Harry. "I don't care. You can have it, I don't really want it." Harry never wanted to set foot in number twelve Grimmauld Place again if he could help it. He thought he would be haunted for ever by the memory of Sirius prowling its dark musty rooms alone, imprisoned within the place he had wanted so desperately to leave.' (HBP "Will and Won't" p.52 UK edition) From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 22:03:35 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 22:03:35 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship / Second Task Points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152006 > >>Pippin: > > Did the judges make it about winning by awarding Harry points > for moral fiber? Only if you think it's about who gets the most > points. :) Betsy Hp: That's my entire point, Pippin. By *awarding points* for "moral fiber" the judges make Harry's gesture about *getting points*. They make it about winning. Which is *not* what sportsmanship is all about. HOWEVER!! In this post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152004 Ginger goes to canon, and causes a very loud "d'oh" to echo through my house. > >>Ginger: > > Cedric: 47 points. 1st to return, although 1 minute outside the > time limit. Used bubble-head charm as well. > > Harry: 45 points. Used gillyweed "to great effect". Was the last to > return. Showed moral fibre by saving Gabriel. > > It seems to me that Harry is getting bad press for being late, when, > in fact, they were all late, if they arrived at all. > I don't think in something this subjective, 6-10 points for moral > fibre is that out of line. Had he not shown it, he would have > arrived before the time was up. They had no negative comments about > any other part of his performance, so he would probably have gotten > the full 50. In other words, moral fibre cost him 5 points, but not > the full 11-16 that being late would have cost him had he not had a > good reason for being late. > Betsy Hp: So, erm... yeah, turns out *Cedric* actually won this particular challenge. (Which would explain his lack of protest anyway. ) I agree with Ginger's analysis that Harry gained more points for his use of gillyweed and his returning with a hostage (something Fluer lost points for) than for his "moral fiber". Which does make me feel better, but also takes a lot of the wind out of the sails of my argument. As the creator of this particular thread I do apologize for not checking canon myself. Sorry. :( Betsy Hp (feeling a bit sheepish, but still standing firm that good sportsmanship should have nothing to do with winning or losing and moral fiber should be its own reward) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 22:10:39 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 22:10:39 -0000 Subject: Anima(l/gus) Portal /"Snape Victorious" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152007 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Pippin: > << Lupin says that no Hogwarts students ever found out more about the grounds or the village than the Marauders did. (snip) Maybe they found a long lost pet door? >> > Catlady: > Not lost to the pets. As Betsy Hp wrote in > , > << there are any number of beasties within the castle that like to > get out for a bit of romp on their own. Crookshanks is one familiar > we know of, but other cat familiars probably like to get out for a > night-time hunt as well. >> > Carol responds: IIRC, Scabbers/Wormtail only goes outside once (when Wormtail is faking his death at the hands, erm, teeth of Crookshanks), and he's so small he can sneak out when a student opens the front door. Granted, Crookshanks does get outside, but he's a cat. He could just jump out an open window (I doubt that Hogwarts windows have screens) and follow a student back inside when the door opens. Where is the evidence that pet doors actually exist at Hogwarts--and if they do exist, they'd be made for cats, not dogs the size of Padfoot, right? Carol earlier: > << As for other chapter titles that might be similarly misleading, how about "Snape Victorious," in which Snape seems to be achieving a long-cherished ambition but is in fact being publicly acknowledged as the latest appointee to a jinxed, or perhaps cursed, position that ultimately leads to disaster for him and for Hogwarts? >> > Catlady: > I thought the title 'Snape Victorious' referred to Snape getting to enjoy a few minutes of verbally beating up on Harry without interference. Thus he was victorious over 'Tonks' who wanted to protect Harry. Carol again: That's what I thought at first, but Snape has many opportunities to be alone with Harry (and to perform Legilimency on him, as I think he's doing here). But during the chapter discussion for "Snape Victorious," other posters pointed out that Snape received the (supposedly) long-desired DADA position. Of course, he actually was appointed to the position earlier, possibly even before "Spinner's End" despite his words to Bellatrix implying otherwise, but the information isn't revealed to Harry and the reader until this chapter. Harry definitely thinks that Snape wants the DADA position (Percy told him that Snape wanted Quirrell's job in SS/PS), and in HBP, the narrator, paraphrasing Harry's thoughts, asks rhetorically, "How could Snape be given the Defense Against the Dark Arts position after all this time? Hadn't it been widely known for years that Dumbledore did not trust him to do it?" (HBP Am. ed. 166-67). As Snape waves to the Slytherins, Harry thinks he sees Snape gloating: "Harry was sure he could detect a look of triumph on the features he loathed so much" (167). So from Harry's POV, the appointment looks like a victory for Snape, but a victory that may well prove disastrous considering the fate of previous DADA teachers. (Harry hopes that the "jinx" will result in Snape's death, 167.) Considering that Snape is surely at least as aware as Harry of the so-called jinx on the DADA post, I'm guessing that any "triumph" on his fate is either a delusion of Harry's or an act of Snape's. And Harry is certainly wrong about Dumbledore's reasons for not giving snape the post earlier. So I would say that the title reflects Harry's PoV rather than fact and that it's ironic considering the consequences of Snape's "victory" to himself (and, if he's DDM!, the consequences to Dumbledore). IOW, it's an example of a misleading title that's something more than a cute bit of wordplay like "Will and Won't." Or so it seems to me. Carol From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon May 8 22:25:02 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 22:25:02 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152008 Pippin: But Harry has never known civilized times. He has suffered grievously from the assumption that if there is anything wrong someone else will take care of it, and he does not make that assumption himself. >From his point of view and from the point of view of anyone who believed there was a malign agency interfering with the conduct of the tournament, making sure that all the hostages were rescued was the right thing to do and an example of international magical cooperation which is what the tournament is supposed to be about. As Hermione says, it's not supposed to be about *winning*. a_svirn: I agree with your every word, (except for the international cooperation, that is. I'd say British wizards have the same right to be rescued). But I did not question *Harry's* view of the "big picture". The question was whether Cedric and Krum should have assumed that anything was amiss. And the answer is no, they shouldn't. Unlike Harry they knew nothing about "malign agency". They weren't encouraged by everyone who mattered to them from their headmasters and their parents and Godparents to their best friends to believe that someone is trying to kill them, that they should fear their own shadow and look askance at everyone who is not the member of the immediate circle. Even at their fellow champions. No, they happily went about their business, since for all they knew the times were still civilized. As civilized as it gets in the WW, that is. Which is why making up for Harry at their expense was unfair. Pippin: Did the judges make it about winning by awarding Harry points for moral fiber? Only if you think it's about who gets the most points. :) a_svirn: Most assuredly I do. Points is what any tournament is about. Pippin: Well, to be honest, the raison d'etre is a plot device. [agreed ? a_svirn] But one can imagine that in the past, a school tried to avoid the disgrace of losing by claiming that they had never meant to enter in the first place, or more likely, someone attempted a win by confunding all the other candidates into withdrawing. Whatever. But the judges *are* obligated to hold the contest and award the thousand galleons once the goblet has made its choice. I don't see them calling the whole thing off. Karkaroff threatens to withdraw and is told that he can't leave his champion -- "binding magical contract". a_svirn: Well, no, not quite. Karkaroff is free to go, actually. Crouch Jr. calls his threat to withdraw "empty" because he can't possibly leave his champion ? Krum ? who is bound magically. "Empty threat, Karkaroff," growled a voice from near the door. "You can't leave your champion now. He's got to compete. They've all got to compete. Binding magical contract, like Dumbledore said. Convenient, eh?" And we saw judges withdrawing ? Crouch Sr. being the case in point. Pippin: They weren't patently bad. Evidently no one had ever managed to tamper with the Goblet before. a_svirn: So what? Binding contracts still provide an opportunity for cheating, or at least unfair treatment of the champions. Even without tempering with the Goblet it's just plain bad rule. Besides, it's not wise, to put it mildly, to assume that just because no one has managed the feat so far, no one will. Surely the *good* rules must have some provision for such an eventuality. SSSusan again: To me it's not an issue of Cedric not *caring* about the other hostages; it's that he thought they were all *taken care of!* a_svirn: Then everything is just fine with his character and fiber, so why was he punished for something that wasn't his fault? From winkadup at yahoo.com Mon May 8 19:56:59 2006 From: winkadup at yahoo.com (Wendy Dupuy) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 12:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060508195659.97353.qmail@web34112.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152009 > winkadup: > Were both Lily and James in the Order of the Phoenix? Potioncat; >> Actually, yes, they were both in the Order during the first war with Voldemort. Whether either of them knew that Snape was helping the Order is unknown. << winkadup: Do you happen to know when Snape joined the Order as well? Was it after James & Lily's death? From wdcaroline at yahoo.ca Mon May 8 20:09:13 2006 From: wdcaroline at yahoo.ca (Wade Caroline) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 16:09:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: <20060508124226.52724.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060508200913.35846.qmail@web61225.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152010 Kemper: What way do you think he might die unusually? I hope it's not being AK'd or turned inside out. winkadup: Maybe he will die saving Harry, which would leave Harry in shock! wade here: Yes, and Snape will do it with precious little grace! lol From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon May 8 23:16:21 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 23:16:21 -0000 Subject: Hero types / Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152011 > >>Potioncat: > > > > In another thread Snape is offered up as a hero type. I know > > Harry as hero of a genre (with the genre being in dispute) has > > come up. But has anyone ever considered that we might end up > > with several literary types of heroes? > > Is the series big enough for that? > >>Pippin: > It's long been a pet theory of mine that we have three literary > types of heroes in HP. > We have Harry, the epic hero. > Betsy Hp: So, this would be Harry as King Arthur, right? I totally agree with that. > >>Pippin: > We have Ron, the romantic hero. > Betsy Hp: Ron as Han Solo? That's a really tempting thought. Based on the romance part of the definition I can get that. However, I'm not sure I'd say that Ron is the bottom of the social heap. His family is poor, but they're purebloods and very much connected to their society's powerbase. (The British social system rather than the American.) Actually, Hermione may better fit that particular discription. As a muggleborn she's certainly starting at the bottom. Though I'm not sure either she or Ron could really be billed as "Heroes". I mean, they *are* heroic, yes, but I think they're supposed to be more of a support system for Harry (the "real hero") rather than carry a story line all on their own. > >>Pippin: > Then we have Snape, the anti-hero. > Betsy Hp: Snape as Casablanca's Rick Blaine, hmmm. I do think Snape is the series' other hero. He's the antithesis of Harry, his shadow I suppose. Except, I'm not sure Snape is really as disconnected from actually being a hero that the anti-hero requires. Compared to Rick Blaine, Snape is *far* more active in bringing down the enemy than Rick was. I suppose Snape is the sort of hero Rick becomes once the credits to Casablanca roll, but at that point it could be argued that Rick is moving out of the anti-hero role himself. I think. Though I might not be getting exactly what the anti-hero is. Here are some other thought on what hero definition fits Snape: > >>Randy: > [working with the definitions of this web site: http://www.fellowshipofreason.com/archives/4heroes.htm ] > > "The classical hero, he is of royal birth or even... half mortal > and half god." A Half blood Prince seems to fit the bill. Betsy Hp: Well, being a half-blood is sort of like being a halfbreed or a bastard. At least in the eyes of those who care about such things. Which the classical hero does. Actually, *Harry* is the better classical hero than Snape. His blood line is a bit better. (His mom was magical at least.) Though, honestly, I doubt it's pure enough to measure up to the classical ideal. Looking through that list of definitions I think Snape fits more under the Romantic Hero. I'll hit on some of the main requirements: "Birth and class are unimportant" Well, as a halfblood of what appears to be a working (or maybe not even that) class family, Snape's birth and class are certainly not an obvious advantage for him. So that fits. "The battle is internal" Snape, much more so than Harry, has had to struggle with who he is. Becoming a Death Eater in spite of his birth, becoming Dumbledore's man in spite of his friends. I'd say these are signs of an internal struggle. "Passions are outside of individual control" Hello! I don't think I even have to discuss this one. "The hero is moody, isolated and introspective" Another nice pocket definition of Snape, I think. "Loyalty is to a particular project and to a community of like- minded others" Hmm, I'm not sure on this one. I tend to see Snape as more personally loyal to Dumbledore. Though, I think that loyalty is there because Snape believes in what Dumbledore is fighting for. He's not struck me as particularly loyal to other Order members, but I think he is loyal to what the Order stands for. So I guess that fits too. This particular definition says that the Romantic Hero is a type of anti-hero. So going back to Pippin's definition: > >>Pippin: > > They don't resemble heroes in any way -- except that when their > internal code demands it, they will risk everything to save a weak > or innocent person from harm. Betsy Hp: I do agree that Snape's personal code includes protecting the innocent or weak. We see that in PS/SS and most especially in HBP where his healing talents are displayed. What hangs me up is this: > >>Pippin: > > ...they are dishonest, cynical and disillusioned. > Betsy Hp: While I do see Snape as cynical and disillusioned, I'm not sure I'd call him dishonest. Beyond what's required of him as a spy I mean. > >>Sherry: > Can you show me any canon to support the idea that Snape is > tortured inside? > Betsy Hp: We never see inside Snape's head, so obviously there's nothing to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Snape is tortured. But there are moments in canon that do support the idea. The first that comes to mind is in CoS when Snape grips the chairback when he's told Ginny has been taken by the monster. That signals some sort of emotional turmoil going on inside, IMO. When Dumbledore sends Snape back to Voldemort at the end of GoF I'd say there's some internal emotion going on there too. Snape's eyes glitter strangely, and Dumbledore's own reaction suggest that Snape is not embarking on an easy task. So I see that as a time when Snape is under some emotional stress (or torture, if you will). The most obvious is at the end of HBP when Snape is compared to an animal being burned alive. Since Snape isn't being physically injured at that time, I put that down to emotional torture. And, while this one will be more controversial, I count Snape's look of hatred and revulsion when he throws the killing curse at Dumbledore to be evidence of internal and self-directed feeling. IOWs the hatred and revulsion is for himself. Which again points to internal torture. Again, all of these moments can be argued. But if Snape is DDM, than I think these interpertations make sense. Betsy Hp From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon May 8 23:23:40 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 23:23:40 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152012 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > ... I know Harry as hero of a genre (...) has come up. But > > has anyone ever considered that we might end up with several > > literary types of heroes? > > > > Is the series big enough for that? > > > > Pippin: > It's long been a pet theory of mine that we have three literary > types of heroes in HP. > > We have Harry, the epic hero. ... > > We have Ron, the romantic hero. ... > > Then we have Snape, the anti-hero. Anti-heroes fly in the face of > *almost* everything that heroes stand for -- they will never be > held up as an example to small children, ... they usually have a > mysterious past that turns out to be shady or criminal, ...and > disillusioned. They don't resemble heroes in any way -- except > that when their internal code demands it, they will risk > everything to save a weak or innocent person from harm. > > Pippin > bboyminn: Absolutely Pippin, I think you are right on track. In moderm 'myth' nearly every hero has his companion 'anti-hero' as in Luke Skywalker and Hans Solo. I will add another point to the discussion. One can act heroic without being considered or classified as a hero. I think this will be Snape's ultimate fate. Some heroic act or acts will show us that he was on the right side, but that doesn't erase everything he has done in his life; he was a Death Eater, he did kill Dumbledore, etc.... Circumstances may come about in which we see some heroic aspects in Snape's killing of Dumbledore. That is, for the greater long term good, it was the necessary thing in that moment. While, at some point in the future, using hindsight, we may see the heroic nature of that act, we will never consider Snape a hero for doing it. I think it is possible that at some point in the distant future the wizard world will come to understand the nature and need of Snape's action intellectually, I don't think emotionally, they will ever forgive him. So, the central point is that it is possible to act herioc without actually being the hero. Don't know if that helps but there it is. Steve/bboyminn From juli17 at aol.com Mon May 8 23:51:33 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 19:51:33 EDT Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152013 I've been thinking about Patronuses, what we've learned about them, and when. I've also been wondering about what we don't know about them. What we've learned about Patronuses so far: 1. A first Patronus is (or can be) a spontaneous formation, representative of some part of the wizard's character or nature. When Harry produced his first Patronus in POA, he didn't consciously think of a stag. A stag simply appeared. It was only later that he learned a stag was also his father's patronus. Therefore I surmise that somehow Harry's nature, in the manner of his connection to his father (or his subconscious memory of his father) influenced the configuration of his Patronus. 2. A wizard's Patronus can change/can be changed. In HBP Tonks has a new patronus. Here is the exact quote from Snape--"I was interested to see your new Patronus...I think you were better off with the old one. The new one looks weak." It strikes me that this statement isn't one hundred percent clear about how a Patronus changes. Is it Tonks who initiated the change herself, or did her Patronus change in response to some alteration of her nature--e.g. in response to her pining for Lupin, which at the time was foremost in her thoughts? 3. While a Patronus can chase away Dementors, there are also other methods of repelling Dementors. Harry's method of choice is a Patronus, but apparently this is not Snape's method, if we go by Harry's comments in HBP. The When: I can't think of any reason for JKR to introduce the concept of a patronus changing so late in the saga, and in such a brief, isolated moment (Snape mentions it, then the subject never resurfaces) other than to set a foundation for the subject's reappearance in Book 7, this time with plot relevance. What we don't know about Patronuses: 1. As mentioned above, can a wizard consciously change a Patronus, or does the Patronus spontaneously change in response to an alteration in the wizard's nature? 2. More importantly, can a wizard create a Patronus that does *not* reflect his nature or character? For instance, could Voldemort, who we know to be evil, create a phoenix Patronus, something related to Dumbledore's nature--to healing and rebirth--if these traits do not reflect anything within Voldemort's nature or belief system? (I think the answer to #2 is critical, because if a wizard can only create a Patronus that directly reflects his own nature/beliefs, then it would make sense for the Order to trust a phoenix Patronus, which is associated with Dumbledore and all he believes. Even without knowing the identity of the sender, the Order would know the sender has to be loyal to Dumbledore because, in a sense, a Patronus couldn't lie.) 3. Stretching it a little further, can a wizard give or will a Patronus to someone else? I do realize that more than one wizard could have a certain type Patronus, i.e., several wizards could have a hawk, or a wolf, or an otter as a Patronus. (Though since it isn't easy to conjure a Patronus, I do wonder if enough wizards have them that this would be an issue.) Even so, could, say, a phoenix Patronus be specific enough in features to be identified with only one certain wizard? Say, if the phoenix Patronus bears the exact features of Fawkes, rather than of some generalized phoenix? Certainly Dumbledore of all wizards might be powerful enough to make such a Patronus. And if that Patronus showed up again, being used by someone else, the Order would know Dumbledore had given his Patronus to that wizard, in essence assuring that wizard's loyalty to the Order's cause. I said I was stretching it! ;-) 4. Since Tonks changed her Patronus, how did Snape know it was hers? Did she identify herself within the message? Can a wizard choose not to identify him/herself if that is preferred? 5. I've been thinking along the lines of someone else having a changed Patronus in Book 7 (okay, yes, Snape!), but I also have been wondering why Tonks' changed Patronus wasn't identified. I mean, we all (or most of us) are assuming it was a wolf, that it represented Lupin and Tonks' feelings for him. But Snape never exactly identifies the Patronus.Why didn't JKR just have Snape sneer that it was a wolf? Or a dog (if it represented Sirius)? Was it just such a throwaway moment, or a moment specifically there to foreshadow a changed Patronus in Book 7, that she felt it unnecessary to waste words identifying the exact Patronus? Or was she just trying to keep the mystery of Tonks' wan, changed appearance and attitude from being revealed? (I ask this being one who wondered if Tonks was Imperioed or something because she was acting so strange.) Or could it be the identity of Tonks' new Patronus will be important in Book 7 thus couldn't be revealed to Harry, or us? 5. Finally, will the mentioned difference in Harry's and Snape's approaches to repelling Dementors have significance in Book 7? If so, how? (I've been speculating that Harry might save Snape from the Dementors with his Patronus--it makes some poetic sense for Harry to save Snape's soul--though how Snape's unknown method might play into such a scene I don't know.) Questions, questions! The only think I feel sure of at the moment is that the changed Patronus issue will come up again in Book 7. It's just a matter of how, who, when, and why. And maybe where ;-) Any other thoughts or theories? Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dossett at lds.net Tue May 9 00:45:20 2006 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 00:45:20 -0000 Subject: Sportsmanship/legitimacy In-Reply-To: <012601c67245$5e5fbbc0$3166400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152014 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > Alla: > Cedric is a great kid. great kids make mistakes too. > I think that it is even better that I can view Cedric > as not all together perfect, but someone who become a bit too > involved in the game at that point OR of course maybe he did knew > that hostages were not in danger. > > Magpie: > If you assume he thought the hostages were in danger then I think you've > gone far past a kid who's too involved in a game. You've just said he made > the choice to leave people to die because he had a medal to win. I don't > think we ought to be having to make excuses for Cedric as if he didn't live > up to Harry's great example, which was a mistake I believe Harry himself, in > retrospect, feels stupid for making (though Harry has good reason for > personally thinking along these lines in ways Cedric doesn't). There's no > reason this question of people dying ever had to have entered anyone's mind. > Pat: Maybe it's us who have gone too far here: I wonder if the truth lies more to the middle. Cedric and Krum were focused on their task: *rescue hostage, get back first* while Harry and Fleur seemed convinced that the hostages were legitimately in danger. I suspect (and the story works better for me this way) that neither Cedric or Viktor were cold and callused, they were simply doing their part and making the assumption that Harry and Fleur would do theirs, too, thus assuring the safety of all hostages. They never thought farther than that: they just did their jobs. It must be assumed by the reader that none of the champions were told 'if you don't get them back, don't worry, they'll be okay' because there are two champions who obviously are concerned with the safety of the hostages here: Fleur, because she never even made it down there, and Harry, because of his *moral fiber* (or his saving-people-thing!) I must also agree with Steve (?) that their character was part of the awarding of points, or else Karkaroff would have given Harry no points, and both Cedric and Viktor (and their headmasters?) would have lodged formal complaints. > Magpie: > Where is Cedric the cold-blooded psycho who would let a child > die because he got too involved in his points? Pat: Doesn't exist! > > Alla: > Cedric knows what fair play is, but I do think that it is totally > possible that in this task he lost to Harry on "moral fiber" part of > evaluation. Pat: Yes! Yes! Yes! > > Magpie: > Which is proving what's unfair about Harry's moral fibre evaluation. > Canonically this is a test of courage whether or not you can get your > "prize" away from the merpeople and back to shore. Pat: Have to disagree here. Canonically the merpeople do not try to keep the 'prize,' they just guard it until you get there. Nobody had to fight the merpeople to get their hostage. Harry had to fight them to take the others' hostages back, and that seems to be the merpeople's purpose: only let the champion take his/her own hostage, not any others. ~Pat From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 9 00:44:28 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 20:44:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Anima(l/gus) Portal /"Snape Victorious" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060509004428.17166.qmail@web37205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152015 justcarol67 wrote: . Where is the evidence that pet doors actually exist at Hogwarts--and if they do exist, they'd be made for cats, not dogs the size of Padfoot, right? Catherine now: Don't forget that at that time, Sirius was so skinny that as Padfoot he was able to squeeze through the bars at Azkaban. He wasn't the huge menacing beast of OotP....maybe has was able to get through somewhere. If anyone could get into the castle, it would be one of the Marauders, wouldn't it? Catherine (who has had a really bad weekend, culminating in a broken down car in rush hour that is un-fixable unless she gets a new motor; and it has a full tank of gas to boot! Wishing money grew on trees....) __________________________________________________ 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 richter at ridgenet.net Tue May 9 01:57:14 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 01:57:14 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152016 Julie: What we've learned about Patronuses so far: > 1. A first Patronus is (or can be) a spontaneous formation, representative of some part of the wizard's character or nature.
2. A wizard's Patronus can change/can be changed. 3. While a Patronus can chase away Dementors, there are also > other methods of repelling Dementors. Harry's method of choice is > a Patronus, but apparently this is not Snape's method, if we go by > Harry's comments in HBP. > What we don't know about Patronuses: > 1. As mentioned above, can a wizard consciously change a > Patronus, or does the Patronus spontaneously change in response > to an alteration in the wizard's nature? > > 2. More importantly, can a wizard create a Patronus that does *not* reflect his nature or character? > 3. Stretching it a little further, can a wizard give or will a Patronus to someone else? I do realize that more than one wizard could have a certain type Patronus, i.e., several wizards could have a hawk, or a wolf, or an otter as a Patronus. (Say, if the phoenix Patronus bears the exact > features of Fawkes, rather than of some generalized phoenix? >> 4. Since Tonks changed her Patronus, how did Snape know it was > hers? Did she identify herself within the message? Can a wizard > choose not to identify him/herself if that is preferred? > > 5. I've been thinking along the lines of someone else having a > changed Patronus in Book 7 (okay, yes, Snape!), but I also have > been wondering why Tonks' changed Patronus wasn't identified. > I mean, we all (or most of us) are assuming it was a wolf, that > it represented Lupin and Tonks' feelings for him. But Snape never > exactly identifies the Patronus.Why didn't JKR just have Snape > sneer that it was a wolf? Or a dog (if it represented Sirius)? Was > it just such a throwaway moment, or a moment specifically there > to foreshadow a changed Patronus in Book 7, that she felt it > unnecessary to waste words identifying the exact Patronus? Or > was she just trying to keep the mystery of Tonks' wan, changed > appearance and attitude from being revealed? (I ask this being > one who wondered if Tonks was Imperioed or something because > she was acting so strange.) Or could it be the identity of Tonks' > new Patronus will be important in Book 7 thus couldn't be revealed > to Harry, or us? > > 5. Finally, will the mentioned difference in Harry's and Snape's > approaches to repelling Dementors have significance in Book 7? > If so, how? (I've been speculating that Harry might save Snape from > the Dementors with his Patronus--it makes some poetic sense for > Harry to save Snape's soul--though how Snape's unknown method > might play into such a scene I don't know.) > PAR: it was hard to snip julie's post, but I didn't want this to be too long. From POA (American paperback, page 237) we have Lupin's description: "A kind of anti-dementor -- a guardian that acts as a shield between you and the dementor.'..."The patronus is a kind of positive force, a projection of the very things that the dementor feeds upon -- hope, happiness, the desire to survive ...each one is unique to the wizard who conjures it". Based on that, I would postulate that no, it can't be willed or passed on. Each one is unique to an individual's hopes, desires, and joys. Tonks' patronus changes because as she matures (or falls into love) her hopes and desires change. It may well be that Harry's initial patronus is a stag because as a child he saw that of his father and associated it (however subconciously) with safety, happiness, love. It would be interesting to know what Lily's patronus was. The stag is also a recurrant symbol of strength, and has been used for both a christian symbol and a pagan one (the stag god Herne, for one). As for the reason JKR doesn't have Snape identify Tonks' patronus -- first, wolves and dogs can look a lot alike (most "wolf type" dogs such as German Shepherds/Alsatians, Siberian Huskies and the like are regularly mistaken as wolves and Harry isn't a dog expert. JKR however, does have dogs and the crups are based on hers). Identifying Tonks' patronus at this point would be tipping her hand as to which person Tonks loves -- Sirius or Lupin. Snape probably DOES know, but why bother telling Harry? He's talking (or sniping, actually) at Tonks. And keep in mind, Tonk's patronus is NOT a werewolf. It is either a true wolf or a dog (dogs being the domestic edition of a wolf and thus often symbolizing positive aspects where wolves don't). If it had looked like padfoot or a werewolf, Harry would have recognized it. I don't think Snape would be able to do a DD-patronus. He might or might not have a phoenix as his patronus, but if he did, if Lupin is correct, it would NOT be identical to DD's. I rather doubt it is a phoenix -- Snape's nature -- that combination of hope, happiness, desire to survive, etc, that goes into a patronus is highly unlikely to be similar to DD's. I see Snape's patronus being a raven --for one thing, severus snape makes an anagram of RAVEN ESP USES, and a raven rather nicely fits his image, including the mythological context of a raven. JKR did the usual careful selection of a name for Snape -- I found this in an etymology dictionary: snape (v.) "to be hard upon, rebuke, snub," c.1300, from O.N. sneypa "to outrage, dishonor, disgrace." PAR From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 02:08:11 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 02:08:11 -0000 Subject: second task points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152017 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > I looked up the points for the second task. (GoF ch 26) > Which leads us to...How Did They Judge? > If we assume that Krum lost, say 9 points for being late, and 1 point > for his incomplete transfiguration (and that is only a guess- we know > he lost 10 somewhere, but exactly where is certainly up to > interpretation), then Harry, without "moral fibre" points would have > probably gotten somewhere between 35 and 39. He ended up with 45, > which means that about 6 to 10 points out of 45 were for moral fibre. > > It seems to me that Harry is getting bad press for being late, when, > in fact, they were all late, if they arrived at all. > > I don't think in something this subjective, 6-10 points for moral > fibre is that out of line. Had he not shown it, he would have > arrived before the time was up. They had no negative comments about > any other part of his performance, so he would probably have gotten > the full 50. In other words, moral fibre cost him 5 points, but not > the full 11-16 that being late would have cost him had he not had a > good reason for being late. Alla: Brilliant analysis, Ginger, simply brilliant. The only thing I want to add is to speculate that Krum may have lost points not only for his incomplete transfiguration, but for possible failure to retrieve a hostage. Harry ( or narrator through Harry) observes that Krum's transfigured teeth are too awkwardly positioned to cut Hermione's robes and Harry worries that Krum can cut Hermione in half instead. Krum actually gets HELP from Harry here which he does not refuse ( that means to me that Harry's observation is correct and Krum realises that without help he is not in a good position to free Hermione. If mermpeople observed that too, another possible reason for Krum to lose points and another extra-reason for Harry to get those few "moral fiber" points and maybe some for resourcefullness too? Here is the canon: "The shark-man swam straight to Hermione and began snapping and biting at her ropes; the trouble was that Krum's new teeth were positioned very awkwardly for biting anything smaller than a dolphin, and Harry was quite sure that if Krum wasn't careful, he was going to rip Hermione in half. Darting forward, Harry hit Krum hard on the shoulder and held up the jagged stone. Krum seized it, and began to cut Hermione free. Within seconds, he had done it; he grabbed Hermione around the waist, and without a backward glance, began to rise rapidly with her towards the glance" - GoF, paperback, p.501. So, yeah, my another two cents :) JMO, Alla. From elfundeb at gmail.com Tue May 9 02:39:03 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 22:39:03 -0400 Subject: Felix Felicis is a Leaping Golden Placebo and Agent of Misdirection Message-ID: <80f25c3a0605081939g2968e9d2g5932e6f7932eaf8b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152018 As I mentioned in the current chapter discussion, I'm convinced that the liquid in that little bottle of Felix Felicis (hereinafter "Felix") that Harry is carrying around in that sock has no more magical properties than a bottle of snake oil. And old Sluggy is therefore a snake oil salesman. Now, I doubt that this is a new idea. But let's marshal the evidence and see what we can come up with (with apologies to Tonks for adopting the same kind of legal analysis she used in her very interesting post, but as I'm a lawyer I can't think of a better way). Exhibit 1. The potion itself. >From HBP ch. 9: "The potion was splashing about merrily; it was the color of molten gold, and large drops were leaping like goldfish above the surface, though not a particle had spilled." And what does it do? Hermione Granger, who will testify later, told us it's liquid luck. "It makes you lucky." Right, sure. She obviously read it somewhere, which means it's unreliable hearsay unless we can cross-examine the source. It's certainly not something they regularly stock at the apothecary. Testimony stricken. (Of course, with all that splashing and leaping, one would certainly *expect* the potion to do something. But I'll get to that later.) Our first witness, Professor Horace Slughorn, when asked about the potion, testifies that Felix is "[d]esperately tricky to make, and disastrous to get wrong. However, if brewed correctly, as this has been, you will find that all your endeavours tend to succeed . . . at least until the effects wear off." Have you ever used it, Professor? "Twice in my life," said Slughorn. . . . Two tablespoons taken with breakfast. Two perfect days." And why isn't it regularly stocked? Sluggy responds that it is "highly toxic in large quantities. But taken sparingly, and very occasionally . . ." Hmm, must be the poison that makes the potion splash and leap and shine like liquid gold. And what is the toxic effect, Professor Slughorn? "[I]f taken in excess, it causes giddiness, recklessness and dangerous overconfidence." Upon further questioning, Slughorn testifies that he has taken Felix twice, and been rewarded with "[t]wo perfect days." The jurors observe, as does Harry, that while Slughorn's effect is very good, it remains to be seen whether he is play-acting. Our second witness is Ron Weasley. (HBP ch. 14) To summarize his testimony, Ron reasonably believed that Harry spiked his pumpkin juice with Felix immediately prior to the first Quidditch match. And how did that make you feel, Mr. Weasley? "It's a great feeling when you take it," said Ron reminiscently. "Like you can't do anything wrong." But, Mr. Weasley, I thought you testified that the pumpkin juice had *not* in fact been spiked with Felix. "Yeah, but I *thought* I had, didn't I?" said Ron, as though explaining the obvious. "Same difference, really . . ." What happened next? A bit of fortuitous luck. The weather was perfect for Quidditch, was it not, Mr. Weasley? "Yeah." Two of the Slytherins' first-string players, Malfoy and Veasey, did not play, and their places were filled by inferior substitutes. "Lucky, I call it," said Ron. "Vaisey , , , , he's their best goal scorer." And what happened in the match? "[I] saved goals with apparent ease" and "made some truly spectacular saves." And clearly you thought Felix was responsible for your performance, Mr. Weasley? But after the match Harry produced the bottle, still "full of golden potion and the cork was still tightly sealed with wax." Harry's testimony will confirm that you "did it all yourself." Agreed, Mr. Weasley? It wasn't luck after all. We will now present some expert testimony regarding the well documented "placebo effect" from Robert DeLap, M.D., head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Offices of Drug Evaluation: http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html "Expectation is a powerful thing. The more you believe you're going to benefit from a treatment, the more likely it is that you will experience a benefit." And Mr. Claude Steele, a Stanford University professor, conducted tests in which groups were given challenging tests, but minority or women students were told before the test that the test would reveal gender or racial differences in performance. The results *did* reveal a performance gap, but the test of a control group that was told nothing showed no such differences. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/pr/95/950816Arc5120.html http://www.law.nyu.edu/workways/theoretical/stereotype/stereovul.html The next witness is Harry Potter, who took a small dose of Felix before setting off, as he thought, to get a memory from Slughorn. Harry reports that as soon as he took it, "an exhilarating sense of infinite opportunity stole through him; he felt as though he could have done anything, anything at all . . . and getting the memory from Slughorn seemed suddenly not only possible, but positively easy." (HBP ch. 22) Mr. Potter, could this feeling have had anything to do with the potion splashing its way merrily down your esophagus? Could be. And just how does this feeling differ from what Ron reported feeling after drinking pumpkin juice? Yeah, it's just the same. I thought so. And what happened next, Mr. Potter? You decided to go to Aragog's burial. "I feel like it's the place to be tonight, you know what I mean?" You mean you just remembered that Hagrid *needed* you, didn't you? He was grieving and you felt guilty. In fact, Harry, you attribute your every choice to Felix, don't you? *Felix* made you reveal yourself to Slughorn, even though the reason you used Felix was to get a memory from him. *Felix* told you to tell the truth to Slughorn. *Felix* told him not to drink Sluggy's wine. Surely you didn't need Felix to tell you that? Commonsense would tell you that drunkenness would not aid your quest for the memory, right? :: grudging agreement from Harry:: And did you really need Felix to remind you to refill the wine bottles? And is it any surprise that you, Harry Potter, who conjured a Patronus in your third year *because you'd seen yourself do it*, could perform a nonverbal spell when the chips were down? I didn't think so. So what did Felix do for you? Ok, Slughorn crossed your path. You bumped into Ginny, facilitating their breakup. And is Felix responsible for *Ron*'s luck in being given a golden opportunity to break up with Lavender? In fact, wouldn't you say that your confidence was boosted by your ease in exiting Gryffindor Tower through the portrait hole with your invisibility cloak on? How is this different from Malfoy deciding to skip the Quidditch match? Or Veasey being unable to play? Exactly. I didn't think there was any difference, either. Thank you, Mr. Potter. "Objection," shouts Defense Counsel Catlady: <> No problem whatsoever, your Honor. Harry *attributes* his success to Felix, and there may well be something in the potion (its characteristic splishing and splashing, for example) that increases confidence, in the same way that alcohol tends to loosen the tongue. Thus, he would be more likely to *act* on his hunches under the influence of Felix, but it's hard to say based on the text that the hunches themselves came from Felix. Indeed, why *wouldn't* he wander through the vegetable patch? He's hoping to run into Slughorn, isn't he? Maybe he even knows that Slughorn relies on the vegetable patch for potion ingredients. Sorry to disppoint, but there's nothing remarkable whatsoever about this supposed whim of Harry's. We will shortly call Mr. Draco Malfoy, but first, Mr. Potter, did you notice anything when Slughorn announced that the maker of the best Draught of Living Death would be awarded the cauldron of Felix? Harry "saw Malfoy riffling feverishly through his copy of Advanced Potion-Making. It could not have been clearer that Malfoy really wanted that lucky day." He didn't win it, though, did he? And what did you notice, if anything, about Mr. Malfoy's confidence? Did he not look pale throughout the year? Did you not find him crying in the bathroom? Does that sound like a confident student? I thought not. Mr. Draco Malfoy is next. Draco Malfoy, you had a mission to kill Dumbledore, correct? But your first attempt was "clumsy and foolish," according to your head of house (HBP ch. 15), and your second attempt was also rather feeble, to use your headmaster's words. (HBP ch. 27) You were quite stressed, were you not? Didn't you have "dark shadows under [your] eyes, and a distinctly greyish tinge to [your] skin?" Didn't you reach the point where you were "crying -- actually crying" in a Hogwarts bathroom? Nevertheless, notwithstanding that you did not win the Felix bottle, Mr. Malfoy, you did eventually devise a plan that allowed several Death Eaters to enter Hogwarts Castle, correct? But you still failed to kill Dumbledore when he was at your mercy, did you not? Do you think that, if you had won the Felix bottle, you would have had the strength to kill him? Would you have had that strength even if the potion was impotent? ::Malfoy nods, whereupon defense counsel jumps up to object that the line of questioning is speculation. Objection is sustained, but the answers cannot be erased from the jurors' memories:: Finally, we have a series of witnesses who will tell us what happened on another night when Felix was used.defended Hogwarts against the Death Eaters' attack. Harry gave the remainder of his Felix to Mr. Weasley and Miss Granger, instructing them to share it with Mr. Weasley's sister, Ginny. Ginny will testify first. She opines that if they hadn't had the bottle of Felix, "we'd all have been killed, but everything seemed to have just missed us." But wait a minute. Did you not expect a perfect evening after taking Felix? Did you experience a perfect evening? Your brother was disfigured. Your headmaster was killed. Are those the marks of a perfect evening? What was that? You think Slughorn's description of perfection was an exaggeration? We shall see. We will now recall Mr. Weasley. You also took some Felix the night the headmaster was killed. "We did like [Harry] told us." And was your evening perfect? "I messed up . . . Malfoy got past us," said Ron bleakly. "Obviously Malfoy could see because of that Hand thing and was guiding [the Death Eaters]." Ok, I think that means "not perfect." And finally, Miss Granger also took a dose of Felix. And where were you? "Outside Snape's office, yes, with Luna. . . . . It was nearly midnight when Professor Flitwick came sprinting down into the dungeons. He was shouting about Death Eaters in the castle . . . and we heard a loud thump and Snape hurtling out of his room and he saw us and -- and --" "I was so stupid! He said that Professor Flitwick had collapsed and that we should go take care of him while he -- while he went to help fight the Death Eaters." She covered her face in shame . . . "it's so obvious now, Snape must have Stupefied Flitwick, but we didn't realise . . . ." Final question, Miss Granger. Did you consider yourself lucky that evening? I think that muffled response must be a *no*. That ends the testimony; time for closing arguments. The testimony shows that: 1. The Felix potion splashed and leaped, suggesting that anyone ingesting it could not fail to feel *something* as it leaped in big splashes down the throat. And substantial research on the "placebo effect" as well as Mr. Weasley's testimony tell us that the *expectation* that Felix will bring you luck is itself a very powerful effect, boosting the taker's confidence in his thoughts and ideas. 2. The actions Harry credited Felix for were likely not different from how Harry would have acted if he had not imbibed the potion. 3. Ron was quite lucky when he did *not* take the potion; he was less lucky, and certainly did not have a perfect day, when he *did* take it. Nor were the others who took it *lucky*. What effect did the potion have on Hermione? What luck did she have? None, absolutely none, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. Certainly no one who took Felix that night had anything remotely resembling a perfect day. And let's take Ginny's assertion that Felix protected them from the big blond Death Eater's indiscriminate casting of AKs. Yes, they all missed. But Harry instructed Ron and Hermione to share Felix with Ginny, not everyone else. You'd have to believe that with all those curses flying around, one might have hit Lupin, or Tonks perhaps. But they didn't. Nobody was hit because Big Blondy had terrible aim. In other words, there is insufficient evidence to prove that the potion had any effect at all. So what's the point of Felix? Does it just provide a convenient magical excuse for writing in a Death Eater who flings killing curses about indiscriminately, but without killing anyone? I hope not. The defense might argue that a DDM!Snape fan might find this sequence of events very lucky. Snape, they will say, *needed* to accomplish his task -- whether to protect Draco at Dumbledore's request or to accomplish some other goal of Dumbledore's -- and Felix nudged everyone's brain so that they would not get in Snape's way as he rushed to the Astronomy Tower. Felix did nothing of the kind. Everyone let Snape pass because he was a member of the Order, and the Order members fighting the Death Eaters needed help. But on first blush, you might *think* this was the case. And if you think Snape is ESE!, this was a disaster. If you admired Dumbledore, this was a disaster. And if you like resolution and clear answers, this was a disaster. Because we don't know what Snape's up to. And we can't trust Felix to help us interpret the events. Yes, Placebo!Felix is a nice bit of misdirection, isn't it? Debbie whose courtroom experience includes exactly *one* trial [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kernsac at earthlink.net Tue May 9 02:59:27 2006 From: kernsac at earthlink.net (Peggy Kern) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 19:59:27 -0700 Subject: Snape and Fawkes; a wild theory Message-ID: <00db01c67314$966947a0$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> No: HPFGUIDX 152019 Hi, all. This is a totally wild theory, and I haven't finished thinking it through. But it popped into my head as I came in from work tonight, and I figured what the heck? Why not toss it out to stir up the discussion pot a bit. I was thinking about people's mentioning of Snape's healing abilities in relation to Draco. Then I started thinking about Fawkes and how a phoenix's tears bring healing. Okay, so here's my wild theory: What if Fawkes is a transfigured version of Snape? Something to think about and toss around. Peggy http://kernsac.livejournal.com/ From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 9 03:21:02 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 03:21:02 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: <20060508195659.97353.qmail@web34112.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152020 > > winkadup: > Do you happen to know when Snape joined the Order as well? Was it > after James & Lily's death? Potioncat: That depends on what it means to be a member of the Order. DD says that Snape turned before LV's fall and at great personal risk, gave information to DD. (Before LV's fall would be before Lily and James died.) But while Snape was working for DD, that might not mean he was a member of the Order. We don't really know if anyone other than DD knew Snape was working for him. Snape is a fully recognised member of the Order in OoP because he reports to 12 GP to a large group. We might be able to say it is in GoF when DD sends Snape off on a mission in front of others that reveals him as an Order member. (I don't off hand remember who was present when DD sent him.) Perhaps the very visible nature of his role in the Order was to alert LV that Snape was indeed useful at Hogwarts. If LV thought Snape was just another master at the school, he might have pulled him out for a different job. How about that, I just had a brand new idea! (OK, OK the rest of you had that figured out.) From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 9 04:18:03 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 04:18:03 -0000 Subject: Snape and Fawkes; a wild theory In-Reply-To: <00db01c67314$966947a0$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152021 Peggy wrote: > I was thinking about people's mentioning of Snape's healing abilities in > relation to Draco. Then I started thinking about Fawkes and how a phoenix's > tears bring healing. Okay, so here's my wild theory: What if Fawkes is a > transfigured version of Snape? Something to think about and toss around. potioncat: But Fawkes is much older than Snape if he gave his feather for Riddle's wand. Although, there may well be some connection between a phoenix and Snape. From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 02:46:54 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 19:46:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060509024654.96417.qmail@web61323.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152022 Pippin: It's long been a pet theory of mine that we have three literary types of heroes in HP. We have Harry, the epic hero. Epic heroes defend a nation or a culture from an external threat, they exemplify all of its virtues, they are of good family and high social standing (though at the beginning of the story they may have become displaced), their true loves recognize their virtue from the beginning and never seriously consider anyone else, and the love interest is a secondary plot line and may not exist at all. Joe: Yeah that one is fairly easy to see. Pippin: We have Ron, the romantic hero. Romantic heroes start at the bottom of the social heap, the threats they face are internal to their society, and by defeating them the hero rises to achieve fame, fortune and true love. Their love interest is likely to despise them at first and proving themselves in order to win her is a primary plot line. Joe: This is easy to see as well though I think that maybe Ron and Hermione might be a combined romantic hero. You can see each as being at the bottom of the social ladder in their respective ways. In a way they are winning each other. Pippin: Then we have Snape, the anti-hero. Anti-heroes fly in the face of *almost* everything that heroes stand for . They don't resemble heroes in any way -- except that when their internal code demands it, they will risk everything to save a weak or innocent person from harm. Joe: Will Snape risk everything to save a weak or innocent person from harm? I think maybe that's a stretch even for DDM!Snape. There are several reasons Snape could be working for the Order faithfully and in only a couple would he be considered a hero. Personally I think it will be just as weak an ending if Snape turns out to be a hero as if he turned out to be rotten through and through. A Snape that is looking out for himself yet still working against Voldemort just strikes me as having more depth. It also strikes me as more true to his nature but that is just my opinion. Joe From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue May 9 08:08:28 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 08:08:28 -0000 Subject: second task points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152023 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > Harry did the first part well, battled the grindielows (I assume both > of the other boys did as well as Harry) and got his hostage back to > the surface. I assume Harry got full points for the first part and > any that were given to the other boys for getting to the hostages. > He also got points for returning with his hostage, as did the other > guys, even though they were all outside of the time limit. > > If we assume that Krum lost, say 9 points for being late, and 1 point > for his incomplete transfiguration (and that is only a guess- we know > he lost 10 somewhere, but exactly where is certainly up to > interpretation), then Harry, without "moral fibre" points would have > probably gotten somewhere between 35 and 39. He ended up with 45, > which means that about 6 to 10 points out of 45 were for moral fibre. Hickengruendler: Here is the quote, and something that's IMO pretty important: " "Most of the judges" - and here Bagman gave Karkaroff a very nasty look - feel that this shows moral fiber and merits full marks. However ... Mr Potter's score is fourty-five points" " IMO, this indicates that the judges marked the same way they did after the first task, namely that everyone gave their points and in the end the points were just added together. Based on Bagman's words and gestures I assume that Dumbledore, Bagman, Percy and Madame Maxime all gave Harry 10 points and Karkaroff gave 5. Which means that if it weren't for Karkaroff, Harry would have gotten full marks. Seeing that even the morally ambigous characters Percy and Bagman agreed with this (even though Bagman had ulterior motives), and only evil Karkaroff didn't want to give him full marks, I assume that it is JKR's opinion, that he deserved the full marks for his decision. I think it is very arguable, if he deserved it, because I still consider it very stupid, that he honestly thought the judges would let the hostages die like that. Hickengruendler From spirittalks at gmail.com Tue May 9 11:06:18 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 07:06:18 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: second task points References: Message-ID: <001f01c67358$99ed7470$6401a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 152024 Hickengruendler: IMO, this indicates that the judges marked the same way they did after the first task, namely that everyone gave their points and in the end the points were just added together. Based on Bagman's words and gestures I assume that Dumbledore, Bagman, Percy and Madame Maxime all gave Harry 10 points and Karkaroff gave 5. Which means that if it weren't for Karkaroff, Harry would have gotten full marks. Seeing that even the morally ambigous characters Percy and Bagman agreed with this (even though Bagman had ulterior motives), and only evil Karkaroff didn't want to give him full marks, I assume that it is JKR's opinion, that he deserved the full marks for his decision. I think it is very arguable, if he deserved it, because I still consider it very stupid, that he honestly thought the judges would let the hostages die like that. Kim (me): It may have been very stupid but from my point of view, things routinely don't work out like they should in Harry's life. Even when he's asked to leave it to the adults he can't. Reference Professor McGonnegal when the trio told her that they believed someone was going to steal the Sorcerer's Stone, and Professor Lockheart when he bragged that he could stop the basilisk. So far in his experience at Hogwarts the adults have royally messed things up and only Harry and his friends saved the day (not the mention the world). So I think that not only by virtue of being 14 when everything in life is an emergency but by the very nature of his experiences so far in his life, Harry had every reason to fear that the hostages would not be safe if he didn't intervene. He's already learned that the only one he can trust is his friends and himself. Kim 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 willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 9 11:50:08 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 11:50:08 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152025 juli17 wrote: > What we've learned about Patronuses so far: > 1. Therefore I surmise that somehow Harry's nature, in > the manner of his connection to his father (or his subconscious memory > of his father) influenced the configuration of his Patronus. Potioncat: I don't think it's so much the person's nature, as the nature of a "Patron" Harry's is representative of his father. Tonks's is representative of Remus. It sure would have been helpful to know what her earlier Patronus was. I doubt if Merope's would have been some form of the Muggle-Riddle only because there really wasn't a relationship there. With Tonks and Remus there was a romance/friendship even if Remus wasn't committing to a permanent/public declaration. Does anyone know what Ginny's Patronus is? Hermione's is an otter, which seems to reflect a Weasley. Of course, isn't Ron's a Terrier? >Julie: > 2. A wizard's Patronus can change/can be changed. In HBP Tonks has > a new patronus. Here is the exact quote from Snape--"I was interested > to see your new Patronus...I think you were better off with the old one. > The new one looks weak." It strikes me that this statement isn't one > hundred percent clear about how a Patronus changes. Is it Tonks who > initiated the change herself, or did her Patronus change in response to > some alteration of her nature--e.g. in response to her pining for Lupin, > which at the time was foremost in her thoughts? Potioncat: Again, I wish we knew what her old one was. In this case, Snape is communicating something to Tonks. What Harry and the reader get is that the Patronus changed, and Snape isn't impressed with it. Harry will come to think that Sirius is the Patronus and that is what Snape is sneering about. Of course, Snape might have cause to sneer at a Lupin!Patronus too, just on general dislike. He might be saying something else. This is a lot like the conversation between Snape and Lupin about the Marauders' Map (PoA) There's something going on beneath the surface. I think it is important that Tonks is one of the few people we see Snape address by first names. Do we know what she calls him? She doesn't use his name at all in that conversation. It's hard to know if Snape's comment was really about the Patronus or its form or something else entirely. > Julie: > The When: I can't think of any reason for JKR to introduce the > concept of a patronus changing so late in the saga, and in such > a brief, isolated moment (Snape mentions it, then the subject > never resurfaces) other than to set a foundation for the subject's > reappearance in Book 7, this time with plot relevance. Potioncat: This is one of those: "This will have to come up again" type situations that almost makes me think it won't. No, I really think it will, but there have been issues before that we fans were sure would be important that haven't resurfaced....although nothing specific comes to mind. > Julie: > What we don't know about Patronuses: > 1. As mentioned above, can a wizard consciously change a > Patronus, or does the Patronus spontaneously change in response > to an alteration in the wizard's nature? Potioncat: Excpet for DD and Tonks, we've only seen kids conjure a Patronus and so far no one seems to have planned out the form. I think (for what it's worth) that the Patronus is whatever it is, just like the Animagus form. >Julie: > (I think the answer to #2 is critical, because if a wizard can only > create a Patronus that directly reflects his own nature/beliefs, > then it would make sense for the Order to trust a phoenix Patronus, > which is associated with Dumbledore and all he believes. Even > without knowing the identity of the sender, the Order would know > the sender has to be loyal to Dumbledore because, in a sense, > a Patronus couldn't lie.) Potioncat: JKR said a Patronus was resistent to evil. Only the Order members know how to use the Patronus as a message. Now, I suppose Snape could teach someone else to cast a Patronus this way. Or maybe it's important that he didn't teach Patronuses to his DADA class at all. Is a Patronus something DEs would sneer at, like Draco sneered at DADA class in general? So now only the DD side can conjure them? I know other Wizards know about them, but how many witches and wizards can cast them? Oops, I'm mixing two ideas. First, can a Message!Patronus be used for evil purposes? JKR said it couldn't be tampered with, but what if the wizard who cast it had evil intentions? I'm assuming no one in the Order (Pettigrew) became unable to cast one in the first war, or the Order would have known who was the traitor. Second, how many DEs know how to conjure one? > Julie: > 4. Since Tonks changed her Patronus, how did Snape know it was > hers? Did she identify herself within the message? Can a wizard > choose not to identify him/herself if that is preferred? Potioncat: JKR told us, just before HBP came out, that a Patronus was unique to the witch or wizard. Although it changed shape, something about it must have identified it with Tonks. Maybe it speaks in the voice of the one who sent it? > Julie: > 5. I've been thinking along the lines of someone else having a > changed Patronus in Book 7 (okay, yes, Snape!), but I also have > been wondering why Tonks' changed Patronus wasn't identified. Potioncat: I think it was to pull the wool over our eyes throughout HBP. In chp 29 is this line: "And the meaning of Tonks's Patronus and her mouse- colored hair, and the reason she'd come running to find DD when she had heard a rumor someone had been attacked by Greyback, all suddenly became clear to Harry, it had not been Sirius that Tonks had fallen in love with after all." I know Harry's PoV is not always the best guide, but this has the ring of authority to it. >Julie: > 5. Finally, will the mentioned difference in Harry's and Snape's > approaches to repelling Dementors have significance in Book 7? Potioncat: It could be that Harry will save Snape, as you suggested. With all that mist in HBP, it might be good to know more than one way to skin a Dementor. Someone...I wish I remembered who...suggested that Snape may have chased away the Dementors in PoA without a Patronus. It's also interesting that we weren't told what Snape's method was. Very good post, Julie. Lots to think about! Potioncat From silmariel at telefonica.net Tue May 9 12:33:11 2006 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 14:33:11 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hero types / Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200605091433.11853.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152026 > > >>Pippin: > > > > Then we have Snape, the anti-hero. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Snape as Casablanca's Rick Blaine, hmmm. I do think Snape is the > series' other hero. He's the antithesis of Harry, his shadow I > suppose. Except, I'm not sure Snape is really as disconnected from > actually being a hero that the anti-hero requires. Compared to Rick > Blaine, Snape is *far* more active in bringing down the enemy than > Rick was. I suppose Snape is the sort of hero Rick becomes once the > credits to Casablanca roll, but at that point it could be argued > that Rick is moving out of the anti-hero role himself. I think. > Though I might not be getting exactly what the anti-hero is. Spoilers for the Battletech series - I don't have so clear what's an antihero, but here is a list of the characters I perceive as fitting the bill: Martin from Flesh and Blood aka The Rose&The Sword by Verhoeven, Riddick from Pitch Black, leading characters in Sin City, Justin Xiang Allard from the Battletech series the sun and the sword, Case from Neuromancer, Spawn, Wolverine, Motoko Kusanagi from The Ghost in the Shell, Elric of Melnibon? by Michael Moorcock, characters from Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser by Fritz Leiber, Conan the Barbarian, Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean, The Man With No Name in Sergio Leone's Dollars Trilogy, Artemis Fowl. Snape is a clear candidate, just IMO. Silmariel From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue May 9 12:11:27 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 12:11:27 -0000 Subject: MCGonagall and the stone/ Second Task points In-Reply-To: <001f01c67358$99ed7470$6401a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152027 > Kim: > It may have been very stupid but from my point of view, things routinely don't work out like they should in Harry's life. Even when he's asked to leave it to the adults he can't. Reference Professor McGonnegal when the trio told her that they believed someone was going to steal the Sorcerer's Stone, and Professor Lockheart when he bragged that he could stop the basilisk. So far in his experience at Hogwarts the adults have royally messed things up and only Harry and his friends saved the day (not the mention the world). Hickengruendler: McGonagall did not mess up regarding the stone. What she told Harry, that the stone was safe, was the truth. Quirrell would never have been able to get it out of the mirror. It was only Harry's arrival, as well meant as it was, that gave Quirrell and Voldemort a chance to get the stone. If Harry had done nothing, nothing would have happened either. (Not that I blame Harry in this case. From his point of view his actions were totally justified. But the same is true for McGonagall as well). Of course Lockhart messed up big time, but I never understood, why Harry and Ron went to him with this information anyway, instead of choosing one of the other teachers. Also, Lockhart is not Dumbledore. I surely hope Harry makes a difference between trusting Lockhart and trusting Dumbledore, and doesn't throw them in the same pot, just because both happen to be adults. The idea that Dumbledore would have willingly let any of those hostages (three of them being his students!) die, is ridiculous, and Harry should have enough commen sense to realize this. Both Ron (in book 4) and Hermione (in book 5) confronted Harry with his short-sightedness in this situation, and I agree with them. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue May 9 12:19:46 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 12:19:46 -0000 Subject: second task points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152028 > Hickengruendler:> > Here is the quote, and something that's IMO pretty important: > > " "Most of the judges" - and here Bagman gave Karkaroff a very nasty > look - feel that this shows moral fiber and merits full marks. > However ... Mr Potter's score is fourty-five points" " > > IMO, this indicates that the judges marked the same way they did > after the first task, namely that everyone gave their points and in > the end the points were just added together. Based on Bagman's words > and gestures I assume that Dumbledore, Bagman, Percy and Madame > Maxime all gave Harry 10 points and Karkaroff gave 5. Which means > that if it weren't for Karkaroff, Harry would have gotten full marks. > Seeing that even the morally ambigous characters Percy and Bagman > agreed with this (even though Bagman had ulterior motives), and only > evil Karkaroff didn't want to give him full marks, I assume that it > is JKR's opinion, that he deserved the full marks for his decision. I > think it is very arguable, if he deserved it, because I still > consider it very stupid, that he honestly thought the judges would > let the hostages die like that. Ginger again: Drat! I was going to touch on this in my original post and blanked it out. Thanks for bringing it up. You are absolutely correct about the scoring, although I think that Percy is not morally ambiguous in this situation. I think Percy is striving to be fair as fair can be. He was concerned about his brother, of course, but I don't think that what we've seen of him so far makes him out to be someone who would give out points where they weren't merited nor would he withhold them if they were deserved. He is aware that the eyes of the WW are upon him and this is a great PR opportunity for him. I'm sure his goal is to execute his duties with the utmost of integrity. Not that he isn't a prat, just not in this case. Bagman did indeed have ulterior motives. I can just imagine that he was squealing on the inside when he heard that the other judges were impressed with Harry's moral fibre. (He's starting to sound like a breakfast cereal.) I would bet that the original 5 judges had some conversations about scoring. (Percy would have been briefed when he took Crouch's place.) The ones who gave Harry full points all seemed to think it was within the rules. I doubt that "moral fibre" per se had been discussed, but given the nastiness of the WW in other areas, they may have thought to allow for docking points should a contestant attempt to sabotage another, which would open the door for points for or against a contestant's sportsmanship, under which moral fibre (I'm giggling every time I type that now) would certainly apply. Given Karkaroff's ex-DE status and Durmstrang's Dark Arts focus, it would not be unreasonable to assume that the other 4 judges would want something that would temper a desire to do some harmful cheating. Karkaroff may have been in the minority when that decision was reached in the first place, and would certainly not be giving points for it at this point, as it moved his Champion from 2nd to 3rd. I absolutely agree with your assessment of JKR's intentions and beliefs. My point in breaking down the scores was to point out that Harry's full 45 points were not for moral fibre (snigger), but that he got some additional points (I estimated 6-10) along with what he has already earned by deciphering the egg, being able to breathe underwater (which the judges would have no way of knowing that he didn't do on his own) and rescuing his hostage. The moral fibre points were only a small part of the total, and made up for only part of what he lost for being late, which was due to moral fibre. As long as you brought up Krum, I looked at how they scored Harry in the first task. We don't hear how each judge scored the other competitors individually, but for Harry, he got a 10 from Bagman (ulterior motives), an 8 from M Maxime, 9 from Crouch and DD and 4 from Karkaroff. The final result was that he tied with Krum. Note that Karkaroff was the last to show his score, and it was after a pause that he revealed his results. I think he was doing some fast math to assure that whatever he gave Harry didn't put him ahead of Krum (to whom Karkaroff had given the full 10 points). So since we have a previous record of Karkaroff scoring Harry low to keep Krum's advantage, it doesn't surprise me that here he only gave Harry a 5. Heck, for Karkaroff, that's almost generous. When they get to the 3rd task, we are told that Harry and Ced were tied with 85 points, Krum had 80 and they didn't give Fleur's total, only mentioned that she was in last place. Here we go with maths again ;D We know Harry got 40 for the first and 45 for the second, and that does indeed equal 85. Ced had 85 total and received 47 for the second task, so his first task score was 38. Krum tied with Harry on the first task (40) and got 40 on the second task, so his total was 80. Wow! JKR's maths work out! Ok, back to the first task. If Krum got 40 points, 10 of which were from Karkaroff, then the other judges gave his an average of (hang on here) 7.5. Harry's average, minus Karkaroff, was 9 per judge. Had Harry not gotten his moral fibre points (I'm basing this on my reasoning in my previous post) he would have likely ended up scoring somewhere in the 35-39 range. With his first task points, that would have given him 75-79 points going into the 3rd task. He's have been slightly behind Krum, but only by a bit. See how Karkaroff's scoring set things out of kilter? If he had scored the same as the average of the other judges on the first task, Harry's score would have been 45 and Krum's would have been (um...dratted decimals) 37.5. This would have put the total points (minus moral fiber) at 77.5 for Krum and 80-84 for Harry. But Karkaroff had deliberately scored Krum high and Harry low in the first task. The moral fibre points just set that straight. I think that's where JKR's point about moral fibre comes into play. What comes around, goes around. Karkaroff was not fair, Harry was, and "fate" sorted it out for them. Yes, to be precice, it was the other judges who set it straight with their scoring for moral fibre, but I doubt that the other judges were sitting with quill and parchment doing sums on the shore. I think it was indeed, as you say, JKR sending a message that making the hard choice is a reward in and of itself, but that if one takes the high road, sometimes one gets unexpected surprises. I would equate it with being up for a promotion against someone with more experience, but you have a record of moral fibre. The boss is going to look at that when deciding. It may not seem fair to evaluate your moral fibre when the other person looks better on paper and may feel more deserving, but it is something that a boss might take into account. I've done it myself when asked for recommendations. I guess I'm not as hard on Harry for thinking that the hostages were in real danger. I freak out in arcade games when my car crashes, even though I have every reason to believe I haven't actually hurt anyone, much less myself, and that the car will back in driving shape just as soon as I get more quarters. (Not that I frequent arcades much any more at my age.) I don't think it was a case of him not trusting the judges, but rather that he was so immersed (teehee) in his virtual game world that he entirely forgot that it was, indeed, a game. When he gets back above water he chides himself for that very thing. To quote: "Harry felt both stupid and annoyed. It was all very well for Ron; *he'd* (emphisis JKR) been asleep, he hadn't felt how eerie it was down in the lake, surrounded by spear-carrying merpeople who'd looked more than capable of murder." Later, on the shore: "Harry's feeling of stupidity was growing. Now that he was out of the water, it seemed perfectly clear that Dumbledore's safety precautions wouldn't have permitted the death of a hostage just because their champion hadn't shown up." Ooh, another thing popped into my head (sorry, I know this is getting long). He didn't just sit and wait for the other champions, nor did he just untie Gabrielle and drag her up, but he actually fought and threatened the merpeople. They were holding him back to prevent him from freeing the other hostages. I don't know about you, but I'd think that facing scary-looking, spear-carrying people who outnumber you by far, and are physically stopping you from your goal of saving people is certainly worth an extra few points. Ginger, who needs a nice lie-down for after all those numbers. From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue May 9 12:19:57 2006 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 12:19:57 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152029 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > >Julie: > > 5. Finally, will the mentioned difference in Harry's and Snape's > > approaches to repelling Dementors have significance in Book 7? > > Potioncat: > It could be that Harry will save Snape, as you suggested. With all > that mist in HBP, it might be good to know more than one way to skin > a Dementor. Someone...I wish I remembered who...suggested that Snape > may have chased away the Dementors in PoA without a Patronus. It's > also interesting that we weren't told what Snape's method was. Annemehr: 'Twas Talisman, years ago, but she also brought it up again in her second Dark Phoenix post (#151430). She and I also think Snape's Patronus is a Phoenix. As far as Patronuses in book 7 are concerned, I don't think Snape's will change. (Okay, I think Snape is dead, since I have signed on with Talisman's theory.) But I think it would be most interesting if it were Harry's Patronus that changed -- and it would make sense. He's the one who has to get from the boy he is now to the man who will defeat LV, and in my opinion he has a good long way to go yet. My guess? We're going to learn something huge about Lily. Harry's new Patronus will have something to do with her. Annemehr From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 9 13:08:55 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 13:08:55 -0000 Subject: MCGonagall and the stone/ Second Task points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152030 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: Hickengruendler: > Of course Lockhart messed up big time, but I never understood, why > Harry and Ron went to him with this information anyway, instead of > choosing one of the other teachers. Geoff: Because they were expecting him to do something about the problem: '"Just the man," he (Snape) said. "The very man. A girl has been snatched by the monster, Lockhart. Taken into the Chamber of Secrets itself. Your moment has come at last." Lockhart blanched. "That's right, Gilderoy," chipped in Professor Sprout. "Weren't you satying just last night that you've known all along where the entrance to the Chamber of Secrets is?" "I - well, I -" spluttered Lockhart. "Yes, didn't you tell me you were sure you knew what was inside it?" piped up Professor Flitwick. "D-did I? I don't recall..." "I certainly remember you saying you were sorry you hadn't had a crack at the monster before Hagrid was arrested," said Snape. "Didn't you say that the whole affair had been bungled and that you should have been given a free rein from the first?" Lockhart stared around ar his stony-faced colleagues. "I... I really never... You may have misunderstood..." "We'll leave it to you, then, Gilderoy,' said Professor McGonagall. "Tonight will be an excellent time to do it. We'll make sure everyone's out of your way. You''ll be able tot ackle the monster all by yourself. A free rein at last." Lockhart gazed desperately around him but nobody came to the rescue. He didn't look remotely handsome any more. HIs lip was trembling and in the absence of his usually toothy grin he looked weak-chinned and weedy. "V-very well," he said. "I'll - I'll be in my office, getting - getting ready." (COS "The Chamber of Secrets" p.217-18 UK edition) '"D'you know what ?" said Ron, "I think we should go and see Lockhart. Tell him what we know. He's going to try to get into the Chamber. we can tell him where we think it is and tell him it's a Basilisk in there." Because Harry couldn't think of anything else to do, and because he wanted to be doing something, he agreed.' (ibid. p.219) I think in the circumstances, this was the most obvious and logical conclusion that Ron and Harry could come to. Little did they know what "getting ready" was to prove to be! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 13:26:26 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 13:26:26 -0000 Subject: Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152031 > Hickengruendler: The idea that Dumbledore would have > willingly let any of those hostages (three of them being his > students!) die, is ridiculous, and Harry should have enough commen > sense to realize this. Both Ron (in book 4) and Hermione (in book 5) > confronted Harry with his short-sightedness in this situation, and I > agree with them. Alla: Hopefully to make myself clear from the start. I am not arguing the extreme point that Harry's behaviour was the only one possible under circumstances. As others argued if Harry had different upbringing he would have probably realised that Dumbledore would have not let the hostages die. BUT I completely disagree that Harry's idea was stupid either and no, the fact that Harry feels stupid afterwards does not convince me of that. Because he often feels stupid after rushing in danger to save the loved ones. I don't think he should. >From the beginning Harry hears the people DIED in the Tournament in the past. Why is is stupid to assume that it is can happen now too? Just because Hogwarts hosting the event? I am not saying that the assumption should be made that people WILL necessarily die during the TWT, but that people MAY die during the TWT by accident or something, that this is sort of an assumed risk by those who participate. Another thing, which IMO bears repeating - another chamion was hysterical and wondering whether her sister is DEAD. Is she stupid also or maybe she made the same assumption Harry did, which IMO is reasonable. Oh, and speaking about Dumbledore. I don't remember what position you hold about how much DD knew about Draco's activities, but if one thinks that DD knew a lot about those activities, then IMO Dumbledore was willingly risking the lifes of his students after Draco almost killed Katy and Ron by letting Draco run loose during HBP. I go back and forth myself on how much he knew, but to me it is not a pretty picture if he was aware of how much Draco knew. JMO, Alla From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 9 14:11:54 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 14:11:54 -0000 Subject: Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152032 Alla: *(snipping an entire thread here)* > Oh, and speaking about Dumbledore. I don't remember what position you hold about how much DD knew about Draco's activities, but if one thinks that DD knew a lot about those activities, then IMO Dumbledore was willingly risking the lifes of his students after Draco almost killed Katy and Ron by letting Draco run loose during HBP. I go back and forth myself on how much he knew, but to me it is not a pretty picture if he was aware of how much Draco knew. Ceridwen: I read somewhere (Red Hen?) that the two attempts were probably set around the same time, but didn't play out close together. The necklace present that got Katie Bell, and the wine (or was it mead?) for Dumbledore's Christmas that was left with Slughorn - two gifts, with Christmas coming (or past, when Slughorn produces the wine, but given for a Christmas gift), then nothing again until the end. If Dumbledore knew anything of what was going on with Draco, then part of what he knew would have to be that Draco had abandoned this tactic, maybe after Snape's talk with him. Maybe the mead/wine was a surprise as well after the necklace? Ceridwen. From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 9 15:49:00 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 15:49:00 -0000 Subject: Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152033 > Ceridwen: > I read somewhere (Red Hen?) that the two attempts were probably set > around the same time, but didn't play out close together. The > necklace present that got Katie Bell, and the wine (or was it mead?) > for Dumbledore's Christmas that was left with Slughorn - two gifts, > with Christmas coming (or past, when Slughorn produces the wine, but > given for a Christmas gift), then nothing again until the end. If > Dumbledore knew anything of what was going on with Draco, then part > of what he knew would have to be that Draco had abandoned this > tactic, maybe after Snape's talk with him. Maybe the mead/wine was a > surprise as well after the necklace? Magpie: Yes, both those attempts are fairly early in the year I think (I also think that the two times Harry notices Draco physically disintegrating are purposefully after they hit someone else)--but it's still dangerous for Dumbledore to be letting Draco do anything at all. However, I think Dumbledore's feeling is just the same as it is in the Tournament. He thinks he's providing a safe risk, thinking that since he knows what's going on and is watching over things he's got it under control, even if Ron and Katie could both have died. Which is why I would agree with Alla it's not *stupid* of Harry to not trust in the safety of the hostages. He's wrong in that case, and Hermione is right to point out that Harry tends to not even be able to consider that other people may be taking care of things-- there are times when this messes Harry up like with Sirius and with the Stone. But at the same time you can see why Harry would have trouble trusting that things will work out without him. It's funny that I've never thought of it before, but I wonder if Harry and Snape aren't more alike on that score. I can imagine Snape and Harry both wanting more intervention with Draco in HBP because neither of them trust in Dumbledore's claims that he's got it all under control. -m From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue May 9 17:47:16 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 17:47:16 -0000 Subject: Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152035 > > Alla: > BUT I completely disagree that Harry's idea was stupid either and no, > the fact that Harry feels stupid afterwards does not convince me of > that. > > Because he often feels stupid after rushing in danger to save the loved > ones. I don't think he should. Hickengruendler: Generally I agree with you. I think Harry acts to rashly sometimes (but then, what kind of books would it be otherwise? Bit boring, I'd guess ;-) ), but most of the time I can understand him, particularly if there's a sense of real danger and he fears that he has to do something. But I just can't understand him in this particular situation. And I can say it safely, because I already thought this, while reading it for the first time. It was not just during rereading, that I realized, that the hostages never were in real danger. Alla: > From the beginning Harry hears the people DIED in the Tournament in the > past. Why is is stupid to assume that it is can happen now too? Hickengruendler: Yes, and obviously there was a real danger in this tournament. A dragon is not harmless, for example. But neither of this is a reason, to believe that the judges wouldn't hace done anything to assure the hostage's safety. Alla: > Another thing, which IMO bears repeating - another chamion was > hysterical and wondering whether her sister is DEAD. Is she stupid also > or maybe she made the same assumption Harry did, which IMO is > reasonable. Hickengruendler: Yes, I think Fleur was pretty stupid in this scene as well, even though I liked her reaction after Harry saved Gabrielle. ;-) But to be fair, I realize that both Harry and Fleur were highly emotional at that time, and that it's not excatly fair from me, to judge them by completely rational standards. Alla: > > Oh, and speaking about Dumbledore. I don't remember what position you > hold about how much DD knew about Draco's activities, but if one thinks > that DD knew a lot about those activities, then IMO Dumbledore was > willingly risking the lifes of his students after Draco almost killed > Katy and Ron by letting Draco run loose during HBP. > > I go back and forth myself on how much he knew, but to me it is not a > pretty picture if he was aware of how much Draco knew. Hickengruendler: I think Dumbledore knew everything about Draco's plan. (About the plan to kill DD I mean, not about the excat details). This is IMO as good as proven by his monologue shortly before his death, where he told him, that he knew about the task. Even if it turns out, that Snape is indeed be evil and turned out to have fooled Dumbledore, Dumbledore still probably knew that something was going on regarding Draco. And you are right, it is not a very nice thought. But the reason for Dumbledore not to act here, was because Draco's life was in danger as well, and he wanted to save him, too. Even though his decisions here are ambigous and were nearly fatal (and had in fact serious consequences for Bill in the end), I do not think it's on the same level, than simply letting four children on the ground of the lake, because the champions failed in their task. Hickengruendler From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 18:06:47 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 18:06:47 -0000 Subject: Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152036 > Alla: > > > From the beginning Harry hears the people DIED in the Tournament in > the > > past. Why is it stupid to assume that it is can happen now too? > > Hickengruendler: > > Yes, and obviously there was a real danger in this tournament. A > dragon is not harmless, for example. But neither of this is a reason, > to believe that the judges wouldn't have done anything to assure the > hostage's safety. Alla: Why is it not a reason to believe that people may die in the Tournament if you get the information that people well died in the Tournament in the past? I think it is a very good, rational reason to believe exactly that. Not saying that this is the only conclusion to make, but I consider it to be quite a sound conclusion. And again, it does not even imply that judges would not have done everything possible, it just implies that deadly incidents happen and people are still willing to play this game. Doesn't somebody tells Harry at some point that deadly incidentts happen even in Quidditch? Not sure here. > Alla: > > > Another thing, which IMO bears repeating - another champion was > > hysterical and wondering whether her sister is DEAD. Is she stupid > also > > or maybe she made the same assumption Harry did, which IMO is > > reasonable. > > Hickengruendler: > > Yes, I think Fleur was pretty stupid in this scene as well, even > though I liked her reaction after Harry saved Gabrielle. ;-) But to > be fair, I realize that both Harry and Fleur were highly emotional at > that time, and that it's not exactly fair from me, to judge them by > completely rational standards. Alla: Well, then we are far apart then on this issue. If Fleur did not have the information that hostages were not in danger, why her automatic assumption should have been that nothing would happen to them? She knows what happened in the past, I would imagine. Nothing changed in the tournament rules, as far as we know, except the age line, right? Well, I guess we don't know that since we don't have the written rules at our disposal, but wouldn't we have been informed if other significant changes were made? I would say that Harry and Fleur while being emotional made quite an understandable conclusion, which to me passes rationality muster. > Hickengruendler: > But the > reason for Dumbledore not to act here, was because Draco's life was > in danger as well, and he wanted to save him, too. Even though his > decisions here are ambiguous and were nearly fatal (and had in fact > serious consequences for Bill in the end), I do not think it's on the > same level, than simply letting four children on the ground of the > lake, because the champions failed in their task. > Alla: Frankly, I think the reason why Dumbledore acts as an idiot here (IMO) is because JKR again makes him juggle too many responsibilities ? teacher and leader of the Order. But yes, his decisions in HBP are not on the same level as to consciously let four children die ( and as I said I don't think Harry even needs to reach this conclusion ? just that this is an incident and people MAY die). Nevertheless his actions in HBP are ENOUGH in my book to support the idea that Dumbledore MAY put the safety of the kids in danger unwillingly at least. That is why I don't consider Harry's actions very emotional or stupid. NOT the only right actions, but definitely not stupid AND the ones to be rewarded too. Especially since he helped Krum to save Hermione too and I completely forgot that till yesterday. JMO, Alla From Merlinsbeard at inbox.com Tue May 9 17:37:55 2006 From: Merlinsbeard at inbox.com (bigdaddy999197) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 17:37:55 -0000 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152037 > Angie here: > I only meant that JKR seems to go out of her way to describe > Hermione in a way that, to me, would mean she was not conventionally > pretty - for example, bushy hair, large teeth. I don't know if JKR > has spoken on the subject. Sorry if I led anyone astray. "bigdaddy999197": In the first description of Hermione JKR seems to make it a point that Hermione is rather plain. Then again she describes the reaction to her appearance when the boys saw her dressed for the ball. The word I would use is surprised. So maybe it is a matter of the ugly duckling maturing into a beautiful swan. She has said little more about Hermione's appearance since so I don't know if she wants to go so far as to put the idea in our heads that she is beautiful so much as she is saying she is not ugly. In a similar vein I have always thought Emma Watson was miscast in the movies for that reason. She is a dynamite actress and has very much become Hermione, but she was a pretty young girl and is growing into a beautiful young woman. Despite her impressive acting skills I wonder if privately Emma was what JKR had in mind when it came to casting. I think she was trying to make a very important point with the character. That there is too much emphasis put on looks. Hermione is a very attractive girl but it has nothing to do with looks. It is a point most boys of an age that would read Harry Potter miss. "bigdaddy999197" From Merlinsbeard at inbox.com Tue May 9 17:53:14 2006 From: Merlinsbeard at inbox.com (bigdaddy999197) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 17:53:14 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152038 > bboyminn: > > I will add another point to the discussion. One can act heroic > without being considered or classified as a hero. I think this > will be Snape's ultimate fate. Some heroic act or acts will show > us that he was on the right side, but that doesn't erase everything > he has done in his life; he was a Death Eater, he did kill > Dumbledore, etc.... > > Circumstances may come about in which we see some heroic aspects in > Snape's killing of Dumbledore. That is, for the greater long term > good, it was the necessary thing in that moment. While, at some > point in the future, using hindsight, we may see the heroic nature > of that act, we will never consider Snape a hero for doing it. > "bigdaddy999197": I like the comment about Snape doing something heroic but not being a hero. I have a hard time with a hero that is mean to children. McGonagall shows tough love. Snape is just mean. I think he did do something heroic though, and he is risking his life if he really is working for the "good guys." *****SPOILER ALERT******* I think Snape knew Dumbledore was going to die anyway. His arm was not healing. A potions master might be called on to try and help. He sees a situation where he can save Draco, who starts to show signs that he is not with the Death Eater camp, and maybe he is aware Harry is there too. He sacrifices Dumbledore for the safety of both boys. "bigdaddy999197" From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 18:23:24 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 11:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060509182324.82335.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152039 Alla: > From the beginning Harry hears the people DIED in the Tournament in the > past. Why is is stupid to assume that it is can happen now too? Hickengruendler: Yes, and obviously there was a real danger in this tournament. A dragon is not harmless, for example. But neither of this is a reason, to believe that the judges wouldn't hace done anything to assure the hostage's safety. Joe: Oh come on, Harry's entire time at Hogwarts has been an object lesson on just how dangerous the place is. They let a man with Voldemort growing on the back of his head teach in Harry's first year and every year since it has grown more apparent the people in charge aren't really in charge. By the time of the TWT Harry would have been an idiot not to assume that every possible situation would be fraught with peril. Harry's actions made perfect sense because he has a grasp of how things really are at Hogwarts in that time. His actions weren't even rash but they were the actions of a boy who has learned to err on the side of caution. Thats why Krum and Cedric didn't think twice about the other hostages. They don't have a good concept of how dangerous Hogwarts is at the time but Harry certainly does. Harry assumes the worst because at Hogwarts that has been his experience danger wise. Joe From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Tue May 9 18:58:58 2006 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 18:58:58 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Patronus 2006 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152040 Hello, everyone-- While many of you know HPforGrownups is supporting the Las Vegas conference Lumos this July, we'd like to take this opportunity to let you all know about another fantastic event we're supporting: Patronus 2006, July 7 - 9, in the incredible city of Copenhagen, Denmark: http://www.patronus.dk/2006/ The event will take place at the University of Copenhagen, and it *will* be in English; registration is underway, and there are still some presentation slots available, too. In addition to the weekend conference, there will be a course the week before for a more in- depth examination of certain aspects of the Harry Potter world; the theme is "Gender and Relationships in Harry Potter," but discussions will not necessarily be limited to this topic. Some highlights of the weekend events: - a showing of Goblet of Fire with a panel and discussion afterwards - selected Papers, Discussions, Round Tables - keynote by Steve Vander Ark of the Harry Potter Lexicon - a fan art competition. Prize: free registration for Patronus - Creative workshops: writing, art and costume design - Quidditch - Filking - Gala event: feast, fashion show, look-a-like contest and charity auction For details on these and other events, make sure to check out: http://www.patronus.dk/2006/events.php Fascinating discussions (check out those papers!), watching Goblet of Fire with a crowd of fans, Quidditch, Filking, fic readings and discussions -- this event has it all! Not to mention the attractions of the gorgeous and historic city of Copenhagen, so much to see and do! A "must" event for Potter fans, however deeply your obsession runs. Hope to see you there! --The Elves From lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk Tue May 9 18:34:50 2006 From: lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk (lunasaproject) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 18:34:50 -0000 Subject: Snape and Fawkes: a wild theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152041 > Peggy wrote: > > What if Fawkes is a transfigured version of Snape? > potioncat: > But Fawkes is much older than Snape if he gave his feather for > Riddle's wand. Although, there may well be some connection between > a phoenix and Snape. "lunasaproject": Well the age difference may not be a problem if Fawkes can be regularly transfigured into Snape. Afterall Fawkes would still be a phoenix, right? "lunasaproject" From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 19:17:40 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 19:17:40 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152042 Pippin wrote: > Then we have Snape, the anti-hero. Anti-heroes fly in the face of > *almost* everything that heroes stand for -- they will never be held up > as an example to small children, they seek no social good and obey only > their own internal code of conduct, their love interests betray them, > they usually have a mysterious past that turns out to be shady or > criminal, they are dishonest, cynical and disillusioned. They don't resemble > heroes in any way -- except that when their internal code demands it, > they will risk everything to save a weak or innocent person from harm. Carol responds: I would classify Snape (assuming that he's DDM!) as a Byronic hero. Here's a partial definition of the term from http://www.umd.umich.edu/casl/hum/eng/classes/434/charweb/CHARACTE.htm : "A Byronic hero exhibits several characteristic traits, and in many ways he can be considered a rebel. The Byronic hero does not possess 'heroic virtue' in the usual sense; instead, he has many dark qualities. With regard to his intellectual capacity, self-respect, and hypersensitivity, the Byronic hero is 'larger than life' . . . . "He is usually isolated from society as a wanderer or is in exile of some kind. It does not matter whether this social separation is imposed upon him by some external force or is self-imposed. . . . "Often the Byronic hero is moody by nature or passionate about a particular issue. He also has emotional and intellectual capacities, which are superior to the average man. These heightened abilities force the Byronic hero to be arrogant, confident, abnormally sensitive, and extremely conscious of himself. In one form or another, he rejects the values and moral codes of society and because of this he is often unrepentant by society's standards. Often the Byronic hero is characterized by a guilty memory of some unnamed . . . crime. Due to these characteristics, the Byronic hero is often a figure of repulsion, as well as fascination." Obviously, the definition doesn't fit perfectly (especially his "emotional capacity"), but even in SS/PS Snape was depicted as intellectually superior to most wizards (his skill in logic, which Hermione notes is rare among wizards), and HBP reveals him as a genius. GoF shows his remarkable courage (a necessary quality in any hero); OoP begins to show us his precocious abilities as a schoolboy (knowing more curses at age eleven than half the seventh years, the detailed response to his DADA OWL, his mastery of Occlumency); and HBP expands the picture to show remarkable ingenuity in potion making and spell creation, as well as wholly unanticipated healing capacities. His knowledge of, or rather expertise in, the Dark Arts fits both the unusual intellectual capacity and the dark side of the Byronic hero. His joining the DEs in the first place qualifies as an act of rebellion against his society's standards (followed by a second act of rebellion or rejection that others, say McGonagall and Lupin, fail to acknowledge, which fits "unrepentant by society's standards"). And, of course, he's moody, arrogant, "abnormally sensitive," and of course he has a guilty memory (or more than one) that drives him. For many readers, especially after the tower scene in HBP, he's "a figure of repulsion, as well as fascination," and he's certainly exiled from society after killing Dumbledore. I would add that Snape's mystique and his dark hair and eyes resemble those of the best-known Byronic heroes, Rochester and Heathcliff, and his black robes trailing behind him as he sweeps from a room, his frequently "unfathomable" expressions, even his dark hair and eyes--suggest a gothic element often associated with Byronic heroes ("gothic" in the sense of the gothic novel, a genre invented by Horace Walpole in 1764--gothic novels are always set in a castle and share certain elements with the Potter books, e.g., ghosts, secret chambers, and prophecies). I'm not sure how the Byronic hero (also called a Satanic hero because of the influence on Byron of Milton's Satan) relates to Pippin's use of the term "anti-hero." Perhaps they're two terms for the same concept, or one is a variant of the other. Carol, fully aware that Snape is not *the* hero of the series and that having affinities with a Byronic/Satanic hero (or an anti-hero) is not the same as actually being one From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 9 19:35:14 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 19:35:14 -0000 Subject: The TWT - a peculiar event In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152043 Pippin: > > Did the judges make it about winning by awarding Harry points > > for moral fiber? Only if you think it's about who gets the most > > points. :) > a_svirn: > Most assuredly I do. Points is what any tournament is about. Geoff: As I remarked in a recent post, in the case of the Tri-Wizard Tournament, points seem to be largely irrelevant. I have been mulling over the TWT and that fact is one of many which seem to add to the overall peculiarity of the contest. On the question of the binding contract, we know little or nothing of its raison d'?tre; this seems to be lost in the mediaeval mists surrounding the first tournaments. However, we cannot just shrug off the contract with a casual "Why didn't Dumbledore cancel it?" We know of the existence of vows which cannot be reversed or cancelled ? the Unbreakable Vow for example - so it is possible that, for some reason, the tournament is covered by something similar. Looking at the question of points again, it is not normal for a competition which is effectively a knockout contest. where one person alone gets the prize at the end, to have aggregated points during its currency. Take tennis as an example. At Wimbledon ? which I choose because I lived within two miles of the grounds for 45 years ? a player advances by beating an opponent and thus goes on to the next round. Obviously points have a bearing within the actual match but there is no carry over to affect the next ? it is a straight win or lose. The same applies to the various football Cup knockout championships whereas in the football leagues, points are paramount because they determine the team's position in the league and also decide on promotion or demotion at the end of a season. Again, in something like the football World Cup, there are groups which play each other where points are necessary to determine which two teams go forward into the knockout phase. But accumulated points count for nothing after that. Hence my curiosity as to why the competitors in the TWT /need/ points. Another oddity, which has been commented on in the past by other contributors I believe, is the spectator element. The pupils turn out to the side of the lake to see what? They see four contestants jump into the lake and disappear under the water. So they chat among themselves about the weather and taxes and the standard of Hogwarts food until eight people surface at various times from the depths of the lake. Exciting stuff Then for the third task, the four champions disappear into a dark and gloomy maze. There is a flurry of excitement when a set of red sparks go up. Then, as they expect a champion to appear with the Cup, Harry appears with the Cup plus a very dead Cedric in tow. The only real task which is a decent spectator sport is the first task when the folk in the stands can see the four competitors battling with their respective dragons and are able to "ooh" and "aah" at the twists and turns of the match. Just to add to the comments on Harry's perception of danger and whether it was justified. We are possibly picking on the safest task to analyse if Ron's views about them being safe are accurate. But there is obviously an element of danger in the first and third tasks. We are told that there have been deaths in the past; the interesting thing to know would be whether the tasks were different in succeeding TWTs. I would imagine that they would be otherwise the competitors in the 1994/95 Tournament might have been able to look up information about tasks used in the past. That apart, there could easily have been a serious injury or death in the first task if one of the four made an error of judgement in approaching their dragon. Harry was cut and Cedric burned on the face. In the third task, what would happen if a competitor tried to answer the Sphinx and got it wrong? "Answer wrongly, - I attack." (GOF "The Third Task" p.546 UK edition). What sort of attack would the Sphinx launch? Also, what about the spider? I am reminded of Shelob's lair in LOTR whenever I read this section as the spider seems just as malevolent and menacing. No, the TWT is quirky and contains actions which are effectively redundant and would get very little TV air time in the 21st century real world. From minluko at yahoo.com Tue May 9 19:52:54 2006 From: minluko at yahoo.com (minluko) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 19:52:54 -0000 Subject: Hero types / Why Snape must ultimately be a hero Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152044 > Betsy Hp: > And, while this one will be more controversial, I count Snape's look >of hatred and revulsion when he throws the killing curse at >Dumbledore to be evidence of internal and self-directed feeling. >IOWs the hatred and revulsion is for himself. Which again points to >internal torture. minluko: You might be right about this. Did you notice that Snape's feelings in the tower scene and Harry's in the cave (when he has to force-feed DD that horrible potion) are described almost in the same words? Snape: "...there was revulsion and hatred..." Harry: "Hating himself, repulsed by what he was doing..." But I think it's possible that Snape just hates DD for what DD makes him do. From Merlinsbeard at inbox.com Tue May 9 19:42:51 2006 From: Merlinsbeard at inbox.com (bigdaddy999197) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 19:42:51 -0000 Subject: The TWT - a peculiar event In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152045 > Geoff: > As I remarked in a recent post, in the case of the Tri-Wizard > Tournament, points seem to be largely irrelevant. > > I have been mulling over the TWT and that fact is one of many > which seem to add to the overall peculiarity of the contest. > > > Looking at the question of points again, it is not normal for a > competition which is effectively a knockout contest, where one > person alone gets the prize at the end, to have aggregated points > during its currency. "bigdaddy999197": I don't see the TWT as a knockout tournament. The definition of a knockout tournament is if you lose you are out. That is not the case with the TWT. The champions continue whether they finish first or last in each event. That said, the point that is it a peculiar event stands. That whoever made it to the end of the maze won the tournment says the point totals, as well as the previous tasks, counted for nothing. "bigdaddy999197" From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 20:07:26 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 20:07:26 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152046 CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 15, The Unbreakable Vow. As the chapter begins, Hogwarts is being decorated for Christmas. Enormously popular as both a Quidditch champion and the Chosen One, Harry resorts to secret passageways to avoid the girls trying to ambush him under the mistletoe. Ron, now enjoying the attentions of Lavender Brown, finds Harry's predicament hilarious. However, he is still refusing to speak to Hermione because she ostensibly "snogged" Viktor Krum two years before, and he still bears the scratches from her conjured birds. Hermione, who doesn't seem to know what she's done to offend Ron, refuses to study in the common room while he and Lavender wind around each other like grapevines. Determined to remain friends with both Ron and Hermione, Harry listens silently and separately as they complain about each other. As Harry eagerly deciphers the Half-Blood Prince's marginal notes on Everlasting Elixirs, Hermione warns him to be careful. Harry retorts that he's learned more from the Prince than from either Snape or Slughorn. But Hermione's warning has nothing to do with the Prince. She informs Harry that a group of girls, including Romilda Vane, is plotting to slip him a love potion so he'll invite one of them to Slughorn's Christmas party. When Harry asks how the potions can be smuggled into the school despite the new precautions, Hermione explains that they're not Dark or dangerous, so they wouldn't be detected by Filch's secrecy sensors, adding that Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes love potions disguised as perfumes or cough potions would probably fool Filch. They hear a noise behind the bookshelves, and Madam Pince appears to inform them that the library is closed. Seeing Harry's book, which the Prince has "desecrated" with his notes and cross-outs, she lunges for it, but Harry snatches it from her grasp. As he and Hermione walk back to the common room, Harry wonders whether Madam Pince was upset because Hermione insulted Filch and suggests that Pince and Filch are secretly in love. As they enter the common room, Romilda offers Harry a gillywater, which he refuses, then thrusts a box of chocolate cauldrons at him, saying that she doesn't want them because they're filled with firewhiskey. At a loss how to decline this offer, he clumsily accepts the chocolates. Hermione starts to give him an "I told you so" lecture, but seeing Ron and Lavender snogging again, she abruptly leaves the room. Harry goes to bed hoping that being apart for the holidays will give Ron and Hermione time to calm down. In Transfiguration the next day, they attempt in front of mirrors to change the color of their eyebrows. Ron sprouts a handlebar mustache at which Hermione laughs unkindly, and Ron retaliates by imitating Hermione bobbing eagerly in her seat with her hand up. Lavender and Parvati laugh, and Hermione runs from the classroom almost crying. Harry finds her emerging from a girls' bathroom accompanied by Luna Lovegood. After Hermione leaves, Luna explains that Hermione is unhappy about "that Ron Weasley." As she states that Ron can be both "very funny" and "a bit unkind," Harry notes Luna's knack for "speaking uncomfortable truths." After she confides that she's been rather lonely without the D.A., Harry invites her to go to Slughorn's party with him "just as friends." At dinner, while Ron is snogging Lavender, Harry and Parvati talk about her parents' decision to let her stay at Hogwarts despite the attack on Katie Bell. Hermione informs them that she's meeting Cormac McLaggen, and Ron pulls back from kissing Lavender. Parvati notes that Hermione likes Quidditch players, and Hermione responds that she likes *really good* Quidditch players. As she leaves, Parvati and Lavender begin gossiping about her and Cormac. Ron stares blankly, and Harry ponders "the depths to which girls [will] sink to get revenge." On his way to the party, Harry encounters a large group of girls, all staring at him as he walks toward Luna, who is dressed in silver spangles but without her radish earrings and butterbeer cork necklace. As they walk toward Slughorn's office, he informs her that a Vampire will be coming and she asks if it's Rufus Scrimgeour. Slughorn's office, apparently magically enlarged, is brightly decorated. Music is playing and house-elves are making their way through the crowd bearing trays of food. Slughorn greets Harry and introduces him to an author named Eldred Worple and his friend Sanguini, a bored-looking Vampire. Worple offers to write Harry's biography, but Harry declines. Spotting a disheveled-looking Hermione, he leaves Worple to talk to her. She tells him that she's just "escaped" from Cormac. Harry says that it serves her right for coming with him. She confesses that she chose Cormac to annoy Ron but had also considered inviting Zacharias Smith, an idea that Harry finds revolting. As Luna talks with Professor Trelawney, who smells of cooking sherry and complains about having to share classes with "Dobbin" (Firenze), Harry asks Hermione whether she intends to tell Ron that she confunded McLaggen and Hermione says that she wouldn't do that. As Cormac appears and Hermione runs off, Trelawney notices Harry for the first time. She tells him that the omens relating to him were never good and that for him of all people, Divination is crucial. Slughorn joins them, drawing a "trapped" Snape into the conversation and giving him partial credit for Harry's "exceptional potion-making." When Snape states his impression that he has not taught Harry anything, Slughorn replies that it must be natural ability. As Snape's eyes bore into Harry, Slughorn asks Harry what other subjects he's taking. Harry lists them, and Snape points out with "the faintest sneer" that those are the subjects required to be an Auror. Harry retorts that that's what he wants to be. Luna tells Harry that the Aurors are involved in the Rotfang Conspiracy, a plot to bring down the MoM through Dark Magic and gum disease, causing Harry to inhale mead up his nose. Filch approaches, holding Draco Malfoy by the ear. Filch tells Slughorn that he found Draco "lurking in an upstairs corridor" and asks Slughorn whether Draco was invited to the party as he claims. Draco pulls away from him, angrily stating, "I was trying to gate-crash. Happy?" When Slughorn allows Draco to stay, Draco looks nearly as unhappy as Filch, and Snape, whose eyes are on Draco, appears to be both angry and, Harry notes with surprise, slightly afraid. As Filch shuffles out, Draco regains his composure and thanks Slughorn for his generosity. Harry notes that Draco has dark shadows under his eyes and his skin has a "distinctly grayish tinge." Snape, smoothing his expression into inscrutability, orders Draco to follow him and they leave despite Slughorn's protests. Telling Luna that he'll be right back, Harry slips into the corridor and puts on his Invisibility Cloak. After pressing his ear against various doors, he hears voices and crouches down to eavesdrop through the keyhole. He picks up the conversation in midsentence as Snape says, ". . . cannot afford mistakes, Draco, because if you are expelled--" Draco cuts him off, denying his involvement. Snape calls the attempt "clumsy and foolish" and informs Draco that he's already suspected. Draco asks who suspects him, arguing that "that Bell girl" must have a secret enemy. Exclaiming "Don't look at me like that!" Draco tells Snape that he knows what Snape is doing, but "it won't work--I can stop you!" Snape notes that Bellatrix has been teaching Draco Occlumency and asks what thoughts he's trying to conceal from his master. Draco retorts, "I'm not trying to conceal anything from *him*. I just don't want *you* butting in!" Harry wonders what has happened to cause Draco to speak so rudely to Snape, whom he has always seemed to like and respect. Snape starts to say what would happen to any other student who refused to meet with him, but Draco again cuts him off with, "So put me in detention! Report me to Dumbledore!" Snape responds, "You know perfectly well that I do not wish to do either of those things." Lowering his voice, Snape tells Draco that he, Snape, is trying to help him: "I swore to your mother I would protect you. I made the Unbreakable Vow, Draco--" Draco sneers that Snape will have to break the vow because he doesn't need Snape's protection, adding that he has a plan but it's none of Snape's business. Snape says that if Draco tells him the plan, he (Snape) can assist him, and Draco says that he has all the assistance he needs and that he'd have had Crabbe and Goyle with him if Snape hadn't put them in detention. When Snape says that Crabbe and Goyle need to work harder if they intend to pass their DADA OWLs this time around, Draco reacts by calling DADA a "joke" and an "act" and sneering that "we" don't need protection against the Dark Arts. Snape asks where Draco thinks that he (Snape) would be if he didn't know how to act and repeats his warning about relying on assistants like Crabbe and Goyle. Draco says that he has "better people" helping him. Snape asks Draco to confide in him, but Draco again interrupts, accusing Snape of wanting to steal his "glory." Snape responds that Draco is speaking like a child, then says he understands that Draco is upset by his father's imprisonment. Draco rushes out of the room, barely giving Harry time to step aside. As Snape, again wearing an "unfathomable" expression, emerges and returns to the party, Harry remains where he is, his mind racing as he contemplates the conversation he has just overheard. Discussion Questions: 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with Lavender and Hermione's reaction? What about Ron's and Hermione's behavior in Transfiguration? What does Harry (whose thoughts are paraphrased by the narrator) mean by "the depths to which girls would sink to get revenge"? 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, potioning him? And how responsible are the Twins, who made and sold the love potions, for the uses to which the potions are put? 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on Everlasting Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's aspersions and Madam Pince's grasping hands. Is he just using the Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? How might this new interest in Potions, if it lasts, play out in Book 7? 4) We later learn that Madam Pince is not the only person listening behind the shelves: Draco is there as well. JKR is clearly misleading the reader with a false or incomplete explanation. Can you think of any other "explanations" that may be revealed as misleading in the future? 5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in love? Is Harry right? 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? What does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or contrasted with Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Do you agree with Harry that Hermione got what she deserved when Cormac ambushed her under the mistletoe? Why or why not? 7) What do you make of Luna's conversation with Trelawney? What insights into Luna does this chapter provide, or is she strictly comic relief? And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star pupil, Severus Snape? Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire Sanguini as a party guest? 7) Why does Snape react as he does to Slughorn's statement that Harry is a "natural" at Potions? Are his suspicions aroused at this point? Do you detect any genuine affection on Slughorn's part for his brilliant former student, or is it all jovial bluster and too much mead? Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? Why or why not? 8) Why does Draco claim to be "gate-crashing" when he was actually upstairs? Why does he look angry when Slughorn allows him to stay? The narrator, voicing Harry's perspective, asks: "Why was Snape looking at Malfoy as though both angry and . . . was it possible? . . . a little afraid?" How would you answer the narrator's (or Harry's) questions? 9) Draco's appearance suggests that he's suffering from stress or insomnia. Do you think that he was really too ill to play Quidditch (previous chapter)? How do you account for the change in his attitude toward his Head of House and former favorite professor? What parallels, if any, do you see between this relationship and Harry's with Dumbledore? 10) Clearly, Crabbe and Goyle are not taking NEWT DADA with Harry and Draco. Might they be repeating fifth-year DADA (rather than taking no DADA class at all), and could they, theoretically, repeat their DADA OWLs as Snape implies? What, if anything, does this detail tell us about Snape's attitude toward DADA? Is he really concerned about Crabbe's and Goyle's DADA OWLs? What is he trying to accomplish by putting them in detention? 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt at Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? How successful are his attempts to evade Snape's questions? What, if anything, does Snape learn from Draco's answers? 12) Snape changes tactics several times during the interview. How and why? Are these changes an indication of weakness or strength? Do any of his statements or questions seem deliberately ambiguous or misleading? How does this conversation tie in with, or affect your understanding of, "Spinner's End"? 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? Why does Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's loyalties lie? Why do you think the chapter is titled "The Unbreakable Vow" when the vow is barely mentioned? Carol, thanking Penapart Elf, Siriusly Snapey Susan, and Potioncat for their comments and suggestions NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 9 20:20:05 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 20:20:05 -0000 Subject: Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore (combining 2) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152047 Alla: > Why is it not a reason to believe that people may die in the Tournament if you get the information that people well died in the Tournament in the past? I think it is a very good, rational reason to believe exactly that. Not saying that this is the only conclusion to make, but I consider it to be quite a sound conclusion. *(snip)* Ceridwen: I was under the impression that would-be champions died in past tournaments, not hostages. From what I gathered, only people who wished to become champions placed their names in the Goblet, of their own free will. A hostage is another matter entirely - he or she would be held or taken against their will (at least, that's the role being played). We see that Harry doesn't know that Ron will be taken until he discovers that Ron's the prize he's playing for in the second task. So, the participation of the hostages is a secret, at least to everyone but the hostages. I do wonder, though, about the events. Does Hogwarts have the hostages in the lake because Hogwarts has a lake and merpeople? Do all of the schools have lakes and merpeople? Is there a general category of hostage scenario which is fulfilled by the hosting school's specifics - Hogwarts with the lake, Durmstrang with perhaps a colony of trolls? Or are there very different tasks tailored to each hosting school? Alla: > Well, then we are far apart then on this issue. If Fleur did not have the information that hostages were not in danger, why her automatic assumption should have been that nothing would happen to them? She knows what happened in the past, I would imagine. Ceridwen: I know we're discussing the judges and the tournament, but it just struck me to wonder about the merpeople: would they have kept the hostages lying around if they weren't rescued? I would think they wouldn't want that. But then, if I just thought about this after... how many years?.. then I can't expect Harry and Fleur to think of it during the stress of the event. Magpie: > Which is why I would agree with Alla it's not *stupid* of Harry to not trust in the safety of the hostages. He's wrong in that case, and Hermione is right to point out that Harry tends to not even be able to consider that other people may be taking care of things-- there are times when this messes Harry up like with Sirius and with the Stone. But at the same time you can see why Harry would have trouble trusting that things will work out without him. Ceridwen: I can certainly see why Harry thought the way he thought. Harry tends to rely on himself to a greater degree than a lot of kids his age, due to living with the Dursleys where it was either stick up for himself or flounder, and the things which have happened to him at the school over the years. I can also see why Krum and Cedric thought the way they thought, too. As far as they knew, things were being taken care of, and I expect they also had more faith in the judges. I don't know about Fleur. She panicked, maybe, and might have been blaming herself for having to abandon the task? Magpie: > It's funny that I've never thought of it before, but I wonder if Harry and Snape aren't more alike on that score. I can imagine Snape and Harry both wanting more intervention with Draco in HBP because neither of them trust in Dumbledore's claims that he's got it all under control. Ceridwen: This is a good point. It does seem as though both Harry and Snape are `rebelling' against Dumbledore's authority, or say-so, in HBP. We see several confrontations between Harry and Dumbledore when Harry questions Dumbledore's word, and we hear about a confrontation between Snape and Dumbledore in the forest, though we don't know what it's about. Interesting line of thought. Thanks! Ceridwen. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 9 21:05:59 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 21:05:59 -0000 Subject: The TWT - a peculiar event In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152049 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bigdaddy999197" wrote: > > > Geoff: > > As I remarked in a recent post, in the case of the Tri-Wizard > > Tournament, points seem to be largely irrelevant. > > > > I have been mulling over the TWT and that fact is one of many > > which seem to add to the overall peculiarity of the contest. > > > > > > Looking at the question of points again, it is not normal for a > > competition which is effectively a knockout contest, where one > > person alone gets the prize at the end, to have aggregated points > > during its currency. > > > "bigdaddy999197": > I don't see the TWT as a knockout tournament. The definition of a > knockout tournament is if you lose you are out. That is not the case > with the TWT. The champions continue whether they finish first or last > in each event. That said, the point that is it a peculiar event > stands. That whoever made it to the end of the maze won the tournment > says the point totals, as well as the previous tasks, counted for > nothing. Geoff: It is a knockout event in the sense that there is only one winner. There is no runner-up; there is no gold medal, silver medal and bronze medal. Winner takes all. That was the thrust of my argument. I take your point that I've perhaps used the wrong phrase. I must go and hit myself over the head with a water jug...... From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue May 9 21:18:41 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 21:18:41 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152050 > Carol: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter > 15, The Unbreakable Vow. zgirnius: WOW! What a summary. I must add, Yahoomort appears to have eatn my first response. Aoologies if it shows up later... > Discussion Questions: > > 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with Lavender > and Hermione's reaction? What about Ron's and Hermione's behavior in > Transfiguration? What does Harry (whose thoughts are paraphrased by > the narrator) mean by "the depths to which girls would sink to get > revenge"? zgirnius: I thought Ron and LavLav's antics were pretty much what I remember from my high-school days. Hermione's reaction was what I would have expected, since I think she is quite interested in Ron. I was amusesd by them in Transfiguration, though I felt sorry for Hermione, because I elt she got the worst of the exchange. I think Harry's thought about the depths is that it is at this moment (when Hermione invited McLaggen) that he begins to fear she will tell from what she did to McLaggen during the tryout. He can't ask her then, because she leaves after setting Lavender and Parvati to gossiping about her and Cormac. (Hmm, her relationship with those girls seems civil, at least...) > 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but > Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's plot > to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, potioning him? > And how responsible are the Twins, who made and sold the love potions, > for the uses to which the potions are put? zgirnius: I don't like the plot, but feel I can't fairly judge it without knowing exaclty how the potion would act and how long it would last. (Ron's reaction was atypical because the potions were past their use- by date). If it is a lot milder than what we saw and short lived, I would probably be OK with classing it as a practical joke of a particularly nasty sort. Though I do think the Twins need to consider a formulation which weakens as it ages rather than the opposite, for safety reasons! > 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on Everlasting > Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's aspersions and > Madam Pince's grasping hands. Is he just using the Prince's notes to > get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the > Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? How > might this new interest in Potions, if it lasts, play out in Book 7? zgirnius: I do think Harry is getting credit for Potions genius he does not possess using the notes, but he is also learning. However, I would not say he has developed an interest in potions. If he were at all interested, wouldn't he wonder why the Prince's instuctions work so much better? And we see in the antidotes lesson later on that he still has no clue about the theory of potions. I think in Book 7 this interest may just play pout in Harry retrieving ghe book to get more information. The very specific way he hid it makes me suspect we will be seeing it again. > 5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in zgirnius: They are in love becaus they are kindred spirits, of course...both love ot pick on the students! And maybe Harry is right-we see the pair together at the funeral, do we not? (Or is that Rowling having some fun?) > 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? What > does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or contrasted with > Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Do you agree with Harry that > Hermione got what she deserved when Cormac ambushed her under the > mistletoe? Why or why not? zgirnius: Harry invited Luna when she revealed to Harry that she was feeling lonely. (It also solved his Romilda problem). This shows to me that he has a good heart. Hermione's motives in inviting Cormac wree (as she herself admits) totally different. I think this only means that Hermione is really upset about Ron, though. Despire my sympathy for her, though, I agree with Harry she deserved Cormac the Devil's Snare. I do not doubt that, had she spent any time getting to know Mr. McLaggen befoer inviting him on a date, she would have known what to expect. Also, the 'ambush', whatever form it took, was clearly something Hermione could handle, and did not find too distressing. > 7) What do you make of Luna's conversation with Trelawney? What > insights into Luna does this chapter provide, or is she strictly comic > relief? And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along > with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star pupil, > Severus Snape? Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire > Sanguini as a party guest? zgirnius: Luna is always comic relief! Though, Trelawney knows her and has missed having her in class. Is she a star Divination student? It fits her personality, somehow. She is far more open to the (whatever it was Trelawney claimed Hermione was closed to). I think Sybill may have worthwhile family connections, since her Seerhood is a little-known fact. I think Sanguini was an homage to the Snape is a vampire theorists by Rowling, though he was also an excuse for the wonderful Mr. Worple and Luna's remarks about Scrimgeour, either of which alone would have been enough to justify his presence, in my eyes. > 7) Why does Snape react as he does to Slughorn's statement that Harry > is a "natural" at Potions? Are his suspicions aroused at this point? > Do you detect any genuine affection on Slughorn's part for his > brilliant former student, or is it all jovial bluster and too much > mead? Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? > Why or why not? zgirnius: Yes, I think Snape's suspicions are aroused. I was very amused by his reaction. He has a very dry sense of humor that I love. I found Sluggie rather insincere-seeming here, though I am really not sure what to make of him. He did seem genuinely affected in his comment when he learned Snape had killed Dumbledore. I did not feel any sympathy for Snape in this scene. He didn;t need any, IMO. While this sort of party is clearly not his milieu, he can clearly handle himself (and even get a few digs in at Harry in the process.) However, Slughorn as Head of House and Potions teacher in Snape's schooldays in general does make me feel sorry for schoolboy Snape. Was he even in the Slug Club? Or did his looks and lack of social graces cause him to be overlooked in favor of a similarly talented, but much better looking and social student in his year? > 8) Why does Draco claim to be "gate-crashing" when he was actually > upstairs? Why does he look angry when Slughorn allows him to stay? The > narrator, voicing Harry's perspective, asks: "Why was Snape looking at > Malfoy as though both angry and . . . was it possible? . . . a little > afraid?" How would you answer the narrator's (or Harry's) questions? zgirnius: I though Draco was taking the opportunity of Harry and Snape both being busy at a party to work on his Vanishing Cabinet problem. Gate- crashing was a convenient excuse, but his lack of anthusiasm made it pretty clear this was a lie. He proibably wanted to get back to his work. Snape was probably looking scared becase he does not know what Draco will try next. His previous try nearly killed Katie Bell... > 10) Clearly, Crabbe and Goyle are not taking NEWT DADA with Harry and > Draco. Might they be repeating fifth-year DADA (rather than taking no > DADA class at all), and could they, theoretically, repeat their DADA > OWLs as Snape implies? What, if anything, does this detail tell us > about Snape's attitude toward DADA? Is he really concerned about > Crabbe's and Goyle's DADA OWLs? What is he trying to accomplish by > putting them in detention? zgirnius: Putting them indetention could certainly have ben useful by taking Darco's support system away from him so he would be forced to turn to Snape foir help. It didn't work, though. This is not the first time SNpae has used the excuse of remedial classes to hide other activities (Occlumency). Which does suggest he may occcasionally do remedial classes/detentions for purely teacherly.Head of ouse sorts of reasons. > 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt at > Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his > accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? How successful are > his attempts to evade Snape's questions? What, if anything, does Snape > learn from Draco's answers? zgirnius: I think Bella may have had some influence on Draco's thinking over the summer. They must have spent a good deal of time together while Draco learned Occlumency (I even suspect there must be secret rooms in Malfoy Manor the Ministry has never found...she may be living with her sister). I think the one thing Snape learned from his answers is that he has some sort of outsiude help (*better than Crabbe and Goyle*). > 12) Snape changes tactics several times during the interview. How and > why? Are these changes an indication of weakness or strength? Do any > of his statements or questions seem deliberately ambiguous or > misleading? How does this conversation tie in with, or affect your > understanding of, "Spinner's End"? zgirnius: I found the exchnage very Spinner's End like in style. Snape again uses the method of saying true things which can be interpreted differently depending on one's expectations. The classic of the genre from this scene, to me, was the line "Where do you think I would have been all these years, if I had not known how to act?" True, no matter whose side the man in on! > 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or > "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? Why does > Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? > zgirnius: This is the same description Snape has as he decidec to take the Vow in Spinner's End. I think it is Snape in high gear as a spy-his mind calculating away madly while his external appearance reveals nothing. > 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's loyalties > lie? Why do you think the chapter is titled "The Unbreakable Vow" when > the vow is barely mentioned? zgirnius: Spinner's End tipped me off the fence and into the DDM! camp. This chapter confirmed my view. Particularly Snape's little "Freudian slip" in his talk with Draco: "What thoughts are you trying to conceal from your master, Draco?" (YOUR master? not OUR?) From kaleeyj at gmail.com Tue May 9 21:28:16 2006 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 21:28:16 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152051 > > Julie: > > The When: I can't think of any reason for JKR to introduce the > > concept of a patronus changing so late in the saga, and in such > > a brief, isolated moment (Snape mentions it, then the subject > > never resurfaces) other than to set a foundation for the subject's > > reappearance in Book 7, this time with plot relevance. > > Potioncat: > JKR said a Patronus was resistent to evil. Only the Order members > know how to use the Patronus as a message. Now, I suppose Snape could > teach someone else to cast a Patronus this way. Or maybe it's > important that he didn't teach Patronuses to his DADA class at all. > Is a Patronus something DEs would sneer at, like Draco sneered at > DADA class in general? So now only the DD side can conjure them? I > know other Wizards know about them, but how many witches and wizards > can cast them? > >Julie: > > 5. Finally, will the mentioned difference in Harry's and Snape's > > approaches to repelling Dementors have significance in Book 7? > > Potioncat: > It could be that Harry will save Snape, as you suggested. With all > that mist in HBP, it might be good to know more than one way to skin > a Dementor. Someone...I wish I remembered who...suggested that Snape > may have chased away the Dementors in PoA without a Patronus. It's > also interesting that we weren't told what Snape's method was. > OO! OO! OO! OO! I am sooooo glad someone picked up on the different approaches to repelling Dementors. I read Potioncat's reply above and almost jumped out of my chair. Snape apparently didn't teach his class about Patroni. I think the Harry filter would have said something about it if he did. Perhaps the reason he didn't teach them (and subsequently argued with Harry about the best way to deal with dementors) was because he didn't want to teach them about Patroni? Maybe because should someone very clever in the Black Hat camp discover how to use them for messages, and extract messages from them, they could be intercepted? Perhaps Snape is trying to cover the order there. I am sure we haven't seen the last of the Dementors. Perhaps the "change in the Patronus' form" scene we saw with Snape and Tonks does have more to it than the obvious. I'd love to learn more about the Patronus messaging that the order uses, I'm sure we'll see it much more often - perhaps Lupin will teach Harry more about it? And two sidenotes: 1) Snape using Tonks' name wasn't all /that/ special. Remember, he /was/ her Professor several years ago. And I'm betting he couldn't care less what your nickname was - he'd call you whatever he wanted to. 2) How does "Figgy" communicate with the Order? She's a Squib. Did she just summon Dung to send something for her, or did DD trust the floo network in her place? `Yb From BrwNeil at aol.com Tue May 9 21:32:45 2006 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 17:32:45 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis Message-ID: <428.7732e6.3192647d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152052 In a message dated 5/9/2006 2:11:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, Merlinsbeard at inbox.com writes: "bigdaddy999197": >In the first description of Hermione JKR seems to make it a point that >Hermione is rather plain. Then again she describes the reaction to her >appearance when the boys saw her dressed for the ball. The word I >would use is surprised. So maybe it is a matter of the ugly duckling >maturing into a beautiful swan. I know this is a site for discussing the books only, but when it comes to what the characters look like I think we have to take into consideration the movies. When we read, we all picture in our minds how a character looks. Movies take that away from us and we now have the casting director's opinion. It is well document that JKR had a lot of say concerning the original casting of the three main characters. If she gave her blessing to Emma Watson, then I consider that as a confirmation that Emma is close to what Rowling pictured Hermione to look like. Neil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 21:47:45 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 21:47:45 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152053 > > >>bboyminn: > > > > I will add another point to the discussion. One can act heroic > > without being considered or classified as a hero. I think this > > will be Snape's ultimate fate. > > > >>"bigdaddy999197": > I like the comment about Snape doing something heroic but not > being a hero. I have a hard time with a hero that is mean to > children. McGonagall shows tough love. Snape is just mean. > Betsy Hp: The funny thing is, I think McGonagall is the scarier and the meaner teacher. I'd take Snape over her any day of the week. (I've had a McGonagall type teacher. Learned a lot, took some massive blows to my self-esteem at the same time. Did teach me a lot about pack behavior though.) But can one be a hero and not be warm and fuzzy? I'd say yes, most definitely. I *do* think Snape will end this series being viewed as a certain type of hero. Plenty of readers seem him as a hero already. He won't replace Harry's role as the main hero of the series. But not everyone will look at him as an unheroic character who did one or two heroic acts. Certainly not amongst the readers. As far as the WW goes, I won't make that call. *Harry* might not even be recognized as a hero in the WW when the books end. I'm sure he'll defeat Voldemort, but it might not be in a manner easily recognized by the WW. (And we've already seen how fickle the WW can be.) > >>Joe: > Will Snape risk everything to save a weak or innocent person from > harm? I think maybe that's a stretch even for DDM!Snape. > Betsy Hp: If Snape is DDM than he's already risked everything to save weak and/or innocent people from harm. Everything he did on the Tower was to save the inhabitants of the school (plenty of weak and innocent folks there). He also risked everything to save Draco (weak and/or innocent, himself). Snape has saved Harry's life at least twice. (Three times counting the end of HBP.) The second time saving the lives of Harry's friends as well. As he's also playing the part of spy, both rescues came with a certain amount of risk. > >>Joe: > Personally I think it will be just as weak an ending if Snape turns > out to be a hero as if he turned out to be rotten through and > through. A Snape that is looking out for himself yet still working > against Voldemort just strikes me as having more depth. It also > strikes me as more true to his nature but that is just my opinion. Betsy Hp: Others share your opinion here, Joe. But I disagree. We've already got the "out for himself" character in Peter Pettigrew. I'm not sure why it'd be more interesting to have Snape ape Peter. Nor do I see why that would give Snape more depth. I also don't see this as being part of Snape's nature. I see Snape as someone with a very strong personal code. Therefore I can't see him being morally ambiguous enough to easily adjust his personal moral code because there's more in it for him if he does so. I think he'd despise such behavior as weak. (Part of his contempt for Lupin, I think.) Snape will do as his code dictates even if it seperates him from his friends; puts his life in danger; forces him to work with people he despises; paints him as the worst sort of betrayer. To me, that is all the depth any character could ask for. > >>Carol: > I would classify Snape (assuming that he's DDM!) as a Byronic hero. > Here's a partial definition of the term from http://www.umd.umich.edu/casl/hum/eng/classes/434/charweb/CHARACTE.ht m : > > "He also has emotional and intellectual capacities, which are > superior to the average man." > > Obviously, the definition doesn't fit perfectly (especially his > "emotional capacity")... > Betsy Hp: Okay, I'll bite. Why do you "especially" think Snape doesn't have superior emotional capacities? How are you defining that phrase? I take it as someone who feels things deeply, and maybe also someone who has a strong sense of what other people are feeling. I think Snape has shown himself to be a man of great feeling. And I think we've seen him demonstrate a pretty keen sense of how others are feeling too. True, it's not often expressed in a *positive* way. But the definition doesn't refer only to positive expression. > >>Carol: > I would add that Snape's mystique and his dark hair and eyes > resemble those of the best-known Byronic heroes, Rochester and > Heathcliff, and his black robes trailing behind him as he sweeps > from a room, his frequently "unfathomable" expressions, even his > dark hair and eyes--suggest a gothic element often associated with > Byronic heroes... > Betsy Hp: Snape certainly has elements of the Byronic hero. Especially when his passion gets away from him. However, there's also the element of reason to Snape. He's not just a man of passion (Byron, etc.) he's also a man of logic and science. There's an element of Sherlock Holmes to Snape. (Ooh, there was an excellent post a while back showing how very similar those two characters are. Do I dare go searching for it? Yes, I do. Here it is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/130772 ) And, as I mentioned earlier in this post, I really see Snape operating under a very strict personal moral code. One that Dumbledore knows and approves of. Hence the trust. Upthread I spoke of the "Romantic Hero" as it pertained to Snape. And there were elements of the anti-hero to that definition as well. My main problem with the anti-hero is that often that sort of hero is more passive in his involvement in the fight against evil. The anti-hero fights almost in spite of himself. Whereas Snape, IMO, is actively and with full understanding of his actions fighting against evil with everything he has. Betsy Hp (wondering what sort of hero Sherlock Holmes would be classified as) From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue May 9 22:05:04 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 22:05:04 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152054 > bex: > 1) Snape using Tonks' name wasn't all /that/ special. Remember, > he /was/ her Professor several years ago. And I'm betting he couldn't > care less what your nickname was - he'd call you whatever he wanted > to. zgirnius: Yes, but he is very careful about using last names. And with female students, even a title. 'Miss Granger', 'Miss Brown'. The only student I can recall him addressing by first name is Draco. Because he's in Snape's House? Because of his relatioinshyip with Draco's family? Who knows, but it does suggests there is something more with him and Tonks than just a teacher/student relationship. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Tue May 9 22:48:44 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 15:48:44 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40605091548u6f787fefl14682a254939a894@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152055 On 5/9/06, horridporrid03 wrote: > > > > > >>Carol: > > > I would classify Snape (assuming that he's DDM!) as a Byronic hero. > > Here's a partial definition of the term from > > http://www.umd.umich.edu/casl/hum/eng/classes/434/charweb/CHARACTE.ht > m : > > > > > > "He also has emotional and intellectual capacities, which are > > superior to the average man." > > > > > Obviously, the definition doesn't fit perfectly (especially his > > "emotional capacity")... > > > > Betsy Hp: > Okay, I'll bite. Why do you "especially" think Snape doesn't > have superior emotional capacities? How are you defining that > phrase? I take it as someone who feels things deeply, and maybe > also someone who has a strong sense of what other people are > feeling. I think Snape has shown himself to be a man of great > feeling. And I think we've seen him demonstrate a pretty keen sense > of how others are feeling too. True, it's not often expressed in a > *positive* way. But the definition doesn't refer only to positive > expression. > > > >>Carol: > > > I would add that Snape's mystique and his dark hair and eyes > > resemble those of the best-known Byronic heroes, Rochester and > > Heathcliff, and his black robes trailing behind him as he sweeps > > from a room, his frequently "unfathomable" expressions, even his > > dark hair and eyes--suggest a gothic element often associated with > > Byronic heroes... > > > > Betsy Hp: > Snape certainly has elements of the Byronic hero. Especially when > his passion gets away from him. However, there's also the element > of reason to Snape. He's not just a man of passion (Byron, etc.) > he's also a man of logic and science. There's an element of > Sherlock Holmes to Snape. (Ooh, there was an excellent post a while > back showing how very similar those two characters are. Do I dare > go searching for it? Yes, I do. Here it is: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/130772 ) > > And, as I mentioned earlier in this post, I really see Snape > operating under a very strict personal moral code. One that > Dumbledore knows and approves of. Hence the trust. > > Upthread I spoke of the "Romantic Hero" as it pertained to Snape. > And there were elements of the anti-hero to that definition as > well. My main problem with the anti-hero is that often that sort of > hero is more passive in his involvement in the fight against evil. > The anti-hero fights almost in spite of himself. Whereas Snape, > IMO, is actively and with full understanding of his actions fighting > against evil with everything he has. > > Betsy Hp (wondering what sort of hero Sherlock Holmes would be > classified as) > Kemper now: I thought your romantic hero pertained to Ron which I thought was perfect. I'll have to re-read it... I can see where some anti-hero's fight the fight in spite of them selves: Han Solo. But there are various types of anti-heros. V and Wolverine seem in choice and fully rage in the fight against evil which isn't to say they fight for the Light which is what Harry and DD fight for. That being said, some anti-heros are for the Dark, sort of (?): Faust and Lucifer. ... I tried to get Snape to fall under a Randian Hero but can't get past the emotional restraint nor the handsomeness pre-req. Though I suppose it could be said that Snape's handsomeness doesn't need to be physical, but that's weak. -Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From AllieS426 at aol.com Tue May 9 23:06:09 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 23:06:09 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > <> > > 8) I also wonder if Ginny has had to endure other people making > comments similar to the one Ron never got to finish? Ginny pulled > her wand at the precise moment before Ron called her whatever he was > going to call her. Not that it makes her a slut, but Ginny is pretty > and popular and at age 15, is with her second boyfriend. Allie: I know others have said this, but I really think the "Ginny is a slut" idea is VERY overblown. I almost wonder if fan chatter was the reason that JKR put that argument into the book. Two boyfriends in two years is NOTHING for a 15-year-old girl. And what is Ginny supposed to have done with these boys that makes her a slut? I'm SURE that JKR has not written Harry's love interest as someone who's sleeping around at age 15! > JKR could have given Ginny any temperament that she wanted to, but > she made her spunky and yes, sometimes, angry. I prefer to think > there is a reason for this other than merely matching Harry with > someone who has a strong personality: Could it be that this scene > foreshadows that Ginny may be able to perform an Unforgiveable Curse > and "mean it" (something Harry has yet to pull off)? > Allie: Ooh, I like the idea of Ginny's angry/mean streak being useful in a defense situation. I'm not sure I want her to use an unforgivable curse, but maybe something powerful enough to knock a few death eaters out when it's desperately needed. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 9 23:28:07 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 23:28:07 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152057 Carol's excellent questions on Discussion Questions for ch. 15 HBP, The Unbreakable Vow: Carol: 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with Lavender and Hermione's reaction? What about Ron's and Hermione's behavior in Transfiguration? What does Harry (whose thoughts are paraphrased by the narrator) mean by "the depths to which girls would sink to get revenge"? Ceridwen: I didn't really notice the public snogging until you mentioned it in the chapter summary. Right about then I hoped that you would ask what I thought. I don't care for public displays of affection (PDAs). I particularily think that communal dinnertime is neither the time nor the place. I think that Hermione may justify her reaction on similar grounds, but she's clearly, to me, jealous. And the same goes for Transfiguration. Hermione laughs unkindly, Ron mimicks her unkindly and sends her running. It seems to matter to both of them what the other thinks. The `depths to which girls would sink to get revenge' - Hermione asks McLaggen to Slughorn's party when it's pretty obvious from other chapters that she hasn't given him much thought before. She is doing this to get a dig in at Ron, period. Getting to toss off that line about `good Quidditch players' was just icing on the vengeance cake, along with the un-Hermione-like giggling and other innuendoes. Carol: 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, potioning him? And how responsible are the Twins, who made and sold the love potions, for the uses to which the potions are put? Ceridwen: Love spells and potions are `dark', in my opinion, because they remove a person's will. What is the difference between Imperius, which forces someone to do the bidding of the caster, and a love potion which forces the victim to do the bidding of the potioner? Just because the idea of a love potion is more romantic, that doesn't mean that it's right. We see what using a love potion can lead to, if Merope did indeed use one on Tom Riddle. They are destructive to the relationship as well as an affront to the victim, and they create more victims if there are children involved. They can hurt the legitimate object of the victim's affections, too. A bad thing all around, in my opinion. For the twins, I have two opinions. First, they have the right to sell anything they want to sell as long as it isn't illegal. The object of a business is to make money. Ideally, goods like love potions would not sell, which would make them unattractive to stock. But the twins are shown to have a double standard. They don't want Ginny buying any love potions, but they don't mind selling to other girls. Apparently it hasn't crossed their minds that their brother, or Harry, or some other friend (or even themselves, wouldn't that be a comeuppance!) could fall victim to some scheming girl. Legally, and businesswise, I say they're okay in selling them; morally, I think they're wrong. Carol: 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on Everlasting Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's aspersions and Madam Pince's grasping hands. Is he just using the Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? How might this new interest in Potions, if it lasts, play out in Book 7? Ceridwen: I think he's learning from the Prince. He doesn't have the same baggage at this point with HBP as he does with Snape, and Slughorn is only teaching according to a flawed text. It could also be in part that he sees another student at about his age and level being excited over the class, which can positively influence him more than any teacher, given his aversion to depending on adults. I can't imagine how this will play out in book 7 since we don't know why Aurors have to take N.E.W.T. Potions. I would think that whatever Harry has to do to vanquish Voldemort would have something to do with the tasks that Aurors learn. Carol: 4) We later learn that Madam Pince is not the only person listening behind the shelves: Draco is there as well. JKR is clearly misleading the reader with a false or incomplete explanation. Can you think of any other "explanations" that may be revealed as misleading in the future? Ceridwen: Flitwick being stunned - if I recall correctly, this was Hermione's interpretation of what happened, while Snape told her Flitwick collapsed or fainted or something; The effects of Felix Felicis - Debbie put up a good argument that Felix is merely a placebo and it might turn out that way; the R.A.B. locket and just about everything surrounding it - it's raised more questions than it has answered. I'm sure there are more, but I can't think of anything more offhand. Carol: 5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in love? Is Harry right? Ceridwen: Maybe they're counterparts in Harry's mind? Neither one is up to a healer's standards as is Madam Pomphrey, both are apparently single, both are short with the students (at the very least!), so Harry could be engaging in his own version of a mental fanfic shipping moment here? Carol: 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? What does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or contrasted with Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Do you agree with Harry that Hermione got what she deserved when Cormac ambushed her under the mistletoe? Why or why not? Ceridwen: Asking Luna was a good way to get around all the girls trying to get him to take them as a romantic date. It probably seemed relaxing after all of the chasing going on. He likes Luna as a friend, too, I think, and she hasn't pursued him. Like Krum asking Hermione to the Yule Ball, in fact. I said in another thread that I think Hermione was wrong to use McLaggen like this. McLaggen is a nasty sort of person, but if Hermione is to retain the high ground, she shouldn't invite him just to get back at Ron. Since she was the one to invite him, it implied an interest she didn't genuinely feel. So, any boy, but particularly one as self-confident (egotistical) as McLaggen would naturally think she was attracted to him. She set herself up for the misunderstanding. She certainly chose the wrong guy to try this with, misjudging him as badly as she misjudged the centuars in OotP. McLaggen is what they used to call a boor - he would act this way. While no one deserves that disrespect, she did set herself up and I wonder if there's a reason why she's shown to make the same sort of mistake twice (and barely escape both times). Carol: 7) What do you make of Luna's conversation with Trelawney? What insights into Luna does this chapter provide, or is she strictly comic relief? And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star pupil, Severus Snape? Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire Sanguini as a party guest? Ceridwen: The conversation with Trealwney shows some division between the teachers, even if it is all only on Trelawney's part. Luna was included, I think, to specifically make the point that she speaks `uncomfortable truths'. I think this is a hint to really look at what Luna says, that there's something in her conversation that we need to know. (Reading what Trelawney says, I wonder if she might not be right, that Divination is important for Harry? That's the sort of throw- away line that comes back to haunt us later) Slughorn may have issued a blanket invitation to the staff as a courtesy. This way he can show off his important guests such as the author and the Weird Sisters members to his peers and gain respect. There were also some little old wizards smoking pipes and involved in what seems to be a very learned discussion, another plum for Slughorn. I'm not sure that Snape's Slughorn's former star pupil, the way he goes on about Lily. Of course, he might be trying to impress Harry with stories of his late mother and completely ignoring anyone else who was in that class. Sanguini's inclusion may have been to stop the speculation that Snape was a vampire. Notice that he gravitates toward the girls, while you never hear of Snape doing any such thing. The description is also more extreme than Snape's - emaciated, with dark shadows under his eyes. Of course, it could all be just for fun, just another interesting Being from the Potterverse (and who wouldn't jump at the chance of having a vampire at their party?) Carol: 7) Why does Snape react as he does to Slughorn's statement that Harry is a "natural" at Potions? Are his suspicions aroused at this point? Do you detect any genuine affection on Slughorn's part for his brilliant former student, or is it all jovial bluster and too much mead? Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? Why or why not? Ceridwen: Seven, again? Snape reacts to the news that Harry's a `natural' at Potions the way he does because he hasn't seen it. I think Snape is the pessimist to Slughorn's optimist, he only sees the bad, while Slughorn seems to only see the good in the students that he favors. Snape might have noticed more of Harry's abilities - and he does have abilities since he got an EE on his O.W.L.s - if he allowed himself to notice. But I think he has very little faith in the next generation. If Slughorn was not so enthusiastic toward his `prize', he might wonder why there's such a disconnect between the Harry in his class and the one Snape claims in his class. I think both instructors are being illustrated here. Yes, his suspicions seem to be aroused, though I don't think he's zeroed in on his old Potions book just yet. But now he's looking for a reason why Harry's suddenly a Potions natural. When Slughorn's in his networking mode, I don't think he has genuine affection for anybody. His motto could be, `What Have You Done Lately?' Or, what has your family done? It isn't just bluster and mead, he's got the guy who replaced him and who he in turn replaced, in his clutches, and he intends to milk the situation to his own advantage. Which is one reason why I feel sorry for Snape. Surely Slughorn has checked the records of the students he admits to his N.E.W.T. classes, and he sees the difference between Harry in Snape's class, and Harry in his class. At the least he would have wanted to see why Harry only got an EE rather than an O when he produces so well. Snape admits that he didn't think he taught Harry anything, and instead of saying something diplomatic like, `you must have, look at him now', Slughorn shouts that it's natural ability, no credit to the guy who taught Harry for five years. He could easily have shouted after that, `This is why I'm back, folks! Sevvie couldn't cut it!' and I think it would have fit in. And, Slughorn embarrasses Snape in other ways. He chides him about `skulking'; drags him into a conversation he wanted no part of - he must have known it was going on if he was close enough to be `scooped out of thin air'; he drapes his arm drunkenly around Snape's shoulders - when does *anyone* do that? Not even Dumbledore - this may be the mead, but I think the mead's revealing pure Slughorn. Even the narrator through Harry's eyes calls Snape `trapped'. Carol: 8) Why does Draco claim to be "gate-crashing" when he was actually upstairs? Why does he look angry when Slughorn allows him to stay? The narrator, voicing Harry's perspective, asks: "Why was Snape looking at Malfoy as though both angry and . . . was it possible? . . . a little afraid?" How would you answer the narrator's (or Harry's) questions? Ceridwen: Just because he was upstairs doesn't mean he wasn't trying to figure out a way to gate-crash. Or, at least no one would think it was suspicious. Draco must have wanted to be dragged away so he could escape Snape, and get to his project again, and is surprised that Slughorn decided to allow him to remain. He has other things to do, other plans to test and prepare. He doesn't have time for Quidditch, and he certainly doesn't have time for Slughorn's party. And, Snape knows this. We know from `Spinner's End' that he's made a vow to protect, help, and ultimately complete the task. Here's Draco now, caught flagrantly by Filch, with what must sound like a weak excuse since Snape knows at least that something is up if not what really is up. I suppose the explanation relies on whether one thinks Snape is ESE! or DDM! Will Draco cave and spill the beans? Or, what is he working on so close to the holidays? As an instructor, and the one who has already had to deal with Katie Bell's curse and the necklace which caused it, he may be wondering what else is coming his way, or to another student (or Dumbledore). Of course, there's the possibility that Harry mistook another emotion for fear, but I don't know what that emotion might be. To answer Harry and his narrator, I would just say that he might also be suspecting Draco of the necklace incident and wondering what else he has in the works. Carol: 9) Draco's appearance suggests that he's suffering from stress or insomnia. Do you think that he was really too ill to play Quidditch (previous chapter)? How do you account for the change in his attitude toward his Head of House and former favorite professor? What parallels, if any, do you see between this relationship and Harry's with Dumbledore? Ceridwen: Yes, I do think he was too ill in a way to play Quidditch in the last chapter. Distraction, stress, worry, fear of failure, changing view of what is and is not important, more stress, can make a person's stomach queasy. It will certainly affect his ability to attend to the game the way he should. I would put stress as one major cause of his mistrust of Snape. His mother and aunt both thought that they were sneaking around behind Voldemort's back to go to Snape; Draco could have been told not to talk about his mission and here's Snape, sticking his nose into things. This is something he has to do alone, this is his growing up and away from the shadow of his parents and his adult `baby sitters'. I'm not sure that Draco knows yet that his family is in jeopardy. It's possible, but he was just a hair too cocky at the beginning of the term, in my opinion, for him to know it yet. But it's still something he knows he has to do on his own, and he resents the intrusion, and fights against it. I think Harry went through similar in OotP. He mistrusted everything, and had Dumbledore not even looking at him, avoiding him. He had to go it alone, because he couldn't trust anyone. It seemed, for Harry, that people turned their backs on him. The reasons may have been different for the rebellious stage, but the outcomes were the same. Also, Harry continues to mature in his relationship with DD through HBP, down to doing what he was told without (much) question. I think Draco will mirror Harry with Snape in book 7. Carol: 10) Clearly, Crabbe and Goyle are not taking NEWT DADA with Harry and Draco. Might they be repeating fifth-year DADA (rather than taking no DADA class at all), and could they, theoretically, repeat their DADA OWLs as Snape implies? What, if anything, does this detail tell us about Snape's attitude toward DADA? Is he really concerned about Crabbe's and Goyle's DADA OWLs? What is he trying to accomplish by putting them in detention? Ceridwen: We don't hear about remedial lessons or students being kept back (except for poor Flint?) in the series. But it stands to reason that there must be some sort of mechanism for floundering students. It would be more embarrassing for them to be in the fifth year class, but the WW has never impressed me as being big on coddling kids and their psyches. Also, if Snape says they'll repeat their O.W.L.s, it must happen occasionally or Draco would have used that as a lever for scoffing. He grabs everything else! If this tells us anything about Snape's attitude, and I think it does based on his conversation with Draco, then he believes in the necessity of the class, for whatever reason. If he's DDM! he would see it as necessary, of course. And moreso for Draco, since he's already in Voldemort's ideological clutches and perhaps feeling trapped and wanting out. If he's ESE! it would definitely be a case of knowing one's enemy and the tactics they might use. Countries use the study of their adversaries' methods, why not someone who apparently likes logic the way Snape does? Snape is putting Crabbe and Goyle in detention, I think, mainly to keep them from being used by Draco, either inconveniencing Draco, saving Crabbe and Goyle from becoming accessories, or both. Carol: 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt at Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? How successful are his attempts to evade Snape's questions? What, if anything, does Snape learn from Draco's answers? Ceridwen: Draco doesn't think that knowing how to defend against Dark Arts is for people who use Dark Arts. He isn't thinking deeply enough, but that's a common failing of youth. His attempt at Occlumency didn't work seamlessly - Snape was able to detect it, and knows who has been teaching him. Draco had better not try it with Voldemort, that's all I can say about that as it stands in this chapter. (Could this be why Voldemort threatened Draco's family at Christmas, as I think he did? Draco was unable to hide that he wanted to give up?) I think Draco discounts the possible danger Snape put himself in by taking the UV (I'm not convinced that Ron was right about the penalties). I think he also saw it as his family bringing in someone to coddle him. And as a DE (wannabe, I don't think Draco was fully initiated yet, this would be his hazing), Draco would be watchful for someone out to steal his glory. The DEs don't seem like a trusting bunch, for good reason - LV plays them all against one another for the coveted position of favorite of the week. And, I don't think Draco was very successful at avoiding Snape's questions. Snape learned that Draco is very stressed, pretty much at the end of that one last irritated nerve. He learns that Draco will not cooperate with any attempts to help him, and that things are pretty bad because of it. Carol: 12) Snape changes tactics several times during the interview. How and why? Are these changes an indication of weakness or strength? Do any of his statements or questions seem deliberately ambiguous or misleading? How does this conversation tie in with, or affect your understanding of, "Spinner's End"? Ceridwen: Snape starts by being friendly but firm, and mentioning expulsion. He uses interrogatives, he reminds Draco that he has given him breaks by overlooking Draco's not coming to his office when sent for. He's very patient with Draco's jeering and rudeness. He uses Draco's given name in a way implying closeness and being on the same side. When Draco gives Snape an ultimatum - `You'd better stop telling me to come to your office, then!' - Snape lowers his voice and puts more emphasis on what he is telling Draco. He gives him more information, the UV, but it's probably too late at this point. It sounds like Snape and Draco's *own mother* are colluding against him. Snape questions him then, but is unsuccessful. He's still trying to be friendly, but is becoming more direct. He points out where Draco has given himself the lie of having confederates. He is getting upset himself - Draco is upset already and starting to talk loudly. Snape goes through the list of things he's done, and the things Draco hasn't done, probably talking faster now and not trying to be nice or mean either one. He goes back to almost wheedling to get information, but Draco accuses him of wanting to steal his glory, which makes Snape answer coldly. This is when he brings up Lucius's imprisonment. I don't think he's trying to be understanding, he's just stating facts as he sees them now. I think he is at the end of his patience. Only Draco reached that point first. Draco rushes off, apparently upset. Snape comes out thoughtfully - moving slowly and with an `unfathomable' expression. In my opinion, Snape sounds very parental in this exchange. The changes occur after certain of Draco's outbursts, and I think are reactions to the way the conversation is going. Snape insinuates that he is Draco's better in the DEs, and it sounds like he is saying that he is Draco's master. (?.. !) Draco sets him straight, he isn't concealing anything from his *master*, only from Snape. Ambiguous? How about, `Where do you think I would have been all these years, if I had not known how to act?' To Draco, and probably to Harry, this means that he's a DE who has been pulling the wool over Dumbledore's eyes all this time; if he is DDM!, then he has been using his skills at Defense Against the Dark Arts to get around Voldemort much better than Draco has been doing. This chapter just reinforced that Snape is doing what he promised in Spinner's End, but Draco is blocking him, something no one seemed to foresee. The infamous spanner or monkey wrench in the works, what usually happens to the best-laid plans of mice and men. Carol: 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? Why does Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? Ceridwen: I think it means that Snape is thinking about something. I'm almost positive this is the reason he's `unfathomable' when he goes back to the party. He has a lot to think over, to see if there are any nuances in Draco's retorts that will tell him anything. The first time, when Draco was brought in by Filch, Harry caught him looking at Draco both angry and, possibly, afraid. He is hiding his emotions before he is caught. He doesn't seem to know that Harry saw. Carol: 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's loyalties lie? Why do you think the chapter is titled "The Unbreakable Vow" when the vow is barely mentioned? Ceridwen: At this point, Snape's loyalties are not in evidence at all, except to Draco and to the vow. The vow was important because this chapter shows Snape trying to comply with it almost desperately, and it brings the vow to Harry's notice so that he asks about it and we get information. Carol, thanking Penapart Elf, Siriusly Snapey Susan, and Potioncat for their comments and suggestions Ceridwen, thanking Carol for a good summary and challenging questions, and asking exactly how many feet of parchment Carol was expecting *g*. From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 22:41:40 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 15:41:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060509224140.84832.qmail@web61324.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152058 Betsy Hp: If Snape is DDM than he's already risked everything to save weak and/or innocent people from harm. Everything he did on the Tower was to save the inhabitants of the school (plenty of weak and innocent folks there). He also risked everything to save Draco (weak and/or innocent, himself). Snape has saved Harry's life at least twice. (Three times counting the end of HBP.) The second time saving the lives of Harry's friends as well. As he's also playing the part of spy, both rescues came with a certain amount of risk. Joe: I'm not sure how following Dumbledore's Orders is protecting everyone. Not to mention if he really wanted to keep people safe he would have never let Draco run amok and poison people. Yes I know he is undercover but that implies that hs is willing to let the innocent die to stay under cover. Dumbledore too I might add. From a strictly keeping the students safe POV keeping Dumbledore alive would have to be a priority given Voldemorts fear of him. Err wasn't he cornered into the Unbreakable vow? So he didn't save Draco to protect the weak as much as he was looking out for his own neck. I admit I don't remember when he saved Harry and his friends. It still seems the Snape can be DDM and yet no even be close to a hero. He can be DDM because it is the best of two poor choices. Joe From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 9 23:44:27 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 23:44:27 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152059 zgirnius: > Yes, but he is very careful about using last names. And with female > students, even a title. 'Miss Granger', 'Miss Brown'. The only student > I can recall him addressing by first name is Draco. Because he's in > Snape's House? Because of his relatioinshyip with Draco's family? Who > knows, but it does suggests there is something more with him and Tonks > than just a teacher/student relationship. Ceridwen, daring the dreaded whichever post sends her over the edge: I thought he was being snide to her, since she doesn't like her given name. This is a way to get at Tonks. But it shows that he does know her outside of class, since he can make that sort of dig. Ceridwen. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 9 23:45:49 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 23:45:49 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: <700201d40605091548u6f787fefl14682a254939a894@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152060 Kemper wrote: > I thought your [BetsyHP's] romantic hero pertained to Ron which I thought was perfect. I'll have to re-read it... Carol responds: It was Pippin who classified Ron as a romantic hero and Snape as antihero. Betsy was responding to her post. (So was I in proposing the alternate classification of Byronic hero for Snape.) > Kemper: > I can see where some anti-hero's fight the fight in spite of them selves: Han Solo. But there are various types of anti-heros. V and Wolverine seem in choice and fully rage in the fight against evil which isn't to say they fight for the Light which is what Harry and DD fight for. That being said, some anti-heros are for the Dark, sort of (?): Faust and Lucifer. Carol responds: Or for their own ends, like Frankenstein's monster (book version only!) or Ahab against the White Whale? Snape, whatever his category, doesn't seem to fit with them. Or with Faust or Lucifer. But see my earlier remarks on Milton's Satan as a precursor for the Byronic/Satanic hero. > Kemper: > ... I tried to get Snape to fall under a Randian Hero but can't get past the emotional restraint nor the handsomeness pre-req. Though I suppose it could be said that Snape's handsomeness doesn't need to be physical, but that's weak. > Carol: Most of the time (with notable foaming-at-the-mouth exceptions), Snape *is* emotionally restrained. See his conversation with Draco in "The Unbreakable Vow," for example, or his handling of Harry in the Occlumency lessons (until Harry invades his privacy by entering the Pensieve, that is). As for Snape's looks, I think that the Harry filter plays a part in the descriptions we're presented. When we see Snape in the objectively narrated "Spinner's End," we have Snape's "curtains of black hair" and his sallow complexion, but no mention of an "overlarge" nose or yellow teeth. (Roman noses used to be associated with aristocracy, and many people find them attractive.) Clearly Snape isn't monstrously ugly or Narcissa would not have held his hand, put her face close to his, or shed tears on his chest. (No, I'm not advocating ACID POPS here.) And he does have other attractions, which I think he has deliberately cultivated to overcome the skinny little nerd image from his teenage years, notably his studied movements and modulated voice, as well as a style of speaking (which we first encounter in "The Potions Master" in SS/PS) that marks him as an educated, cultivated man. Even though I'm emphatically not a Snape/Narcissa shipper, I can see someone like her finding the adult Snape attractive. (As for Lily, it's impossible to say.) Carol From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 10 01:47:15 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 01:47:15 -0000 Subject: Hero types / Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152061 > > Betsy Hp: > Ron as Han Solo? That's a really tempting thought. Based on the > romance part of the definition I can get that. However, I'm not > sure I'd say that Ron is the bottom of the social heap. His family > is poor, but they're purebloods and very much connected to their > society's powerbase. (The British social system rather than the > American.) > Actually, Hermione may better fit that particular discription. > As a muggleborn she's certainly starting at the bottom. Pippin: I'm not sure pure blood counts as much as even purebloods would like to think; otherwise it wouldn't matter to Lucius that Hermione beat Draco in every exam. It's Ron who doesn't get invited to join the Slug Club, and Ron is the one with the shabby clothes and the despised "blood traitor' family. Hermione, OTOH, always has all the spending money she needs, and her parents are solidly middle class from what we can tell. She hasn't grown up thinking of herself as underpriveleged, and she really isn't treated that way in the WW. Ron is. Betsy HP: Though I'm > not sure either she or Ron could really be billed as "Heroes". I > mean, they *are* heroic, yes, but I think they're supposed to be > more of a support system for Harry (the "real hero") rather than > carry a story line all on their own. Pippin: I think functionally they're far closer to Han Solo than they are to the droids or Chewbacca. They are invested in plotlines that have nothing to do with Harry (except of course that they will come to naught if he fails.) Though their ambitions seemed as out of reach and comically overblown as Sancho Panza's dream of ruling an island to begin with, Ron's at least are well within his grasp now, and Hermione with the connections she's making through Slughorn may actually have a chance to put some reformist programs into action. All of that is going to make Book Seven incredibly dense, of course, but Rowling's 'third acts' so to speak are always like that. The last few chapters of each book are so thick with plot developments that I always have had to read them two or three times before I felt I had grasped what had happened. > > > >>Pippin: > > Then we have Snape, the anti-hero. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Snape as Casablanca's Rick Blaine, hmmm. I do think Snape is the > series' other hero. He's the antithesis of Harry, his shadow I > suppose. Except, I'm not sure Snape is really as disconnected from > actually being a hero that the anti-hero requires. Pippin: We're not sure, that's the point. If this were Star Wars Ep IV, we'd be at the point where Han (still an anti-hero at this point) had collected his money and abandoned the Alliance, and if it were Casablanca, it'd look like Rick had just betrayed Lazlo so he could run off with Ilsa. Han and Rick have shown us enough personal vice that we believe they might be as rotten as they look to be. Han says, "I'm in this for one person and one person only --" a pure statement of OFH. Rick declares, "I have no nationality --I'm a drunkard." All Snape's words in Spinner's End come down to "I have no loyalties -- I'm a jerk." His cruelty takes the place of Rick's drunkenness (in its 1940's context as a moral failing). We don't *know* how active Snape is in bringing down the enemy at this point --but I wouldn't say Rick had a history of uninvolvement. He'd been helping the republicans in Spain, IIRC. Betsy HP > Though I might not be getting exactly what the anti-hero is. > Pippin: Basically, he's a major character who lacks some traditional heroic attributes, like courage or idealism, or in this case, kindness. Pippin From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 02:05:37 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 02:05:37 -0000 Subject: The TWT - a peculiar event In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152062 > >>Geoff: > > Looking at the question of points again, it is not normal for a > competition which is effectively a knockout contest. where one > person alone gets the prize at the end, to have aggregated points > during its currency. > Betsy Hp: It kind of reminds me of the Tour de France. That race has one winner. But it's done in stages, and the rank you achieve in one stage effects your standings in the next stage. Like how Cedric and Harry were able to go into the maze first. They started the third task with an advantage, because of the points they'd earned. > >>Geoff: > Another oddity, which has been commented on in the past by other > contributors I believe, is the spectator element. The pupils turn > out to the side of the lake to see what? They see four contestants > jump into the lake and disappear under the water. So they chat > among themselves about the weather and taxes and the standard of > Hogwarts food until eight people surface at various times from the > depths of the lake. Exciting stuff > Betsy Hp: Not all sporting events are spectator friendly. My sister's doing a triathalon in a few weeks and she's wanting me to go along and makes it a "sisters' weekend". I'm desperate for us to be allowed to bring husbands, because oh my goodness, triathalons are boring for spectators. (Except for the brief moments of excitement when they switch from one event to another.) I'm betting Bagman kept up a running commentary (not necessarily of the race itself). And one of the things I liked in the media that must not be named was the band playing at the Maze event to keep the crowd pumped. > >>Geoff: > That apart, there could easily have been a serious injury or death > in the first task if one of the four made an error of judgement in > approaching their dragon. Harry was cut and Cedric burned on the > face. Betsy Hp: Which reminds me of NASCAR. (Um, that's a car racing thing, for those not of the US. ) People do die in that competition if they make an error of judgement. (Actually, people have died in the Tour de France too.) And that's not even counting rodeos, which are a sporting event and do pit man against large, quick moving and dangerous beasts where one moment of error can lead to serious injury or death. > >>Geoff: > > No, the TWT is quirky and contains actions which are effectively > redundant and would get very little TV air time in the 21st > century real world. Betsy Hp: The TWT *is* quirky. I won't deny you that. But it does contain elements of sports that do get some air time. (More in some areas than others.) For what it's worth. (Shout out to Steve! ) Betsy Hp From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Wed May 10 02:07:00 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 02:07:00 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152063 Carol wrote the discussion starter and made an excellent job of doing so. I snip the entire post, excepting some portions, and put in my twopen'orth. >1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with Lavender and Hermione's reaction? Goddlefrood: PDAs (public displays of affection) in general appal me, always have, I'm a strictly behind closed doors man. In the book it was obviously necessary to emphasise the whole irrational jealousy thing and was depicted rather well. Many years ago when at school there were several little love triangles going on and I thought JK put the scenarion rather well. One suspects she may have been involved in somesuch herself. Harry's limited experience with girls up to the point where this whole Ron/Hermione/Lavender matter is would justify his reaction, particularly the way he had been treated by Cho the previous year. His maturity is not yet to the point where he could laugh off the situation developing between his two closest friends, but no doubt this would be developed further as part of book 7, by the end of which Harry hopefully will be sailing off into the sunset with the woman of his dreams. >2) How "dark" is Romilda's plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, potioning him? And how responsible are the Twins, who made and sold the love potions, for the uses to which the potions are put? Goddlefrood comments: I'd have to agree with Hermione that the plot is not dark or dangerous. Harry's reaction was mostly due to his undisguised revulsion for Romilda. Unfortunate events ensued from this attempt (Ron's near death and Slughorn's exposure as a less than brilliant potioneer [but's that's a different post perhaps one day]). Had it been drunk fresh an awful lot of later difficulties could have been prevented. I would question why Harry didn't dispose of the poisoned chocolates immediately and perhaps there are those of you who would like to expand on this point. The Weasley Twins are excellent businessmen and there is really little else to say. Whoever said they were responsible for the uses to which their products might be put? They are simply meeting demand for desperate creatures such as Ms. Vane. >3) Is he just using the Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? How might this new interest in Potions, if it lasts, play out in Book 7? Goddlefrood: There's certainly an element of using the Prince's notes (if indeed they are all his) to get good marks. Is there honestly anybody out there who would not take advantage of a leg up if it were as freely presented to them as what Harry is using? Harry's comment on learning more from the book than from his Potion's teachers is a valid opinion he holds and without going into too much detail probably right. How his new interest in potions might pan out deserves a post of its own, but I really should get n with my office work, however to summarise I postulate the following: Lily's noted gift as a potioneer will play a role in book 7 and whether this is by way of Harry discovering some powerful potion developed by Lily that no one (apart from perhaps Snape) is aware of and which has qualities that would finish off the evil that men do or whether the reason Lily was offered her life (or indeed whether these two together are the key to the whole mystery) I could not say for sure. I think I am right in saying that potions and particularly ones developed by Lily will play a significant role in the final furlong. >4) Can you think of any other "explanations" that may be revealed as misleading in the future? Goddlefrood, rather curtly: Plenty. I will, however, only put one here and it is that the Mirror of Erised will have no future importance despite its tremendous significance in PS, contrary to what I have seen by certain theorists. >5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in love? Is Harry right? Goddlefrood, with his tongue firmly in his cheek: Goes back to his immaturity in relationship issues. Snape's stepfather would keep old Severus in line (that is if the theory, which I do not uphold, that Irma is Severus's mother holds true). Afraid I forego the balance for the moment as I really must work a little. Toodle Pip From puduhepa98 at aol.com Wed May 10 02:27:32 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 22:27:32 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Another Snape thread Message-ID: <68.69026d1c.3192a994@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152064 >justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: >With apologies to Geoff and to anyone else who's tired of discussing >Snape, I can't get the man out of my mind. I know perfectly well that >he's a fictional character, but I worry and wonder about him as if he >were real and feel thwarted because I can't do anything about the >predicament he has landed himself in. Nikkalmati: Yes, Carol, I worry about Snape too, but I try not to lose sleep over it. >justcarol: >My concern is this. Snape has nowhere to go except to Voldemort (where, I think, DD wanted and expected him to go at the end of the >year given that he assigned him the DADA position). If he's ESE! or >OFH!, then it doesn't matter. He's wicked, he'll stay wicked, and >that's that. But if he's DDM!--if he killed Dumbledore against his >will because he had no choice--it matters very much. What will he do >now? What *can* he do? Nikkalmati: I think Draco who apparently apparated on his own, did not go to LV. He would probably go home, because he was not sure of how LV would take the events on the Tower. Snape has to go to LV because that is where the DE's are headed and he has to give his side of the story. I also think he has to try to talk LV into forgiving Draco for not killing DD. (The UV may still be active and at the end it may get SS; he could ultimately die protecting Draco). I think SS has enough cachet at this time to pull it off. Maybe he will vouch for Draco's future conduct and take him under his wing. My question is how, if he is DDM, will SS broach the topic to Draco? He can't just sit him down and say: you saw me kill DD, but actually I support the Order and I think you should too! He will have to be subtle about it. I think he will have Narcissa's help. She probably never was a LV fanatic and she will be beholding to SS big time. (Lucias will not be too pleased with LV either). Then he will work on PP by whatever underhanded blackmailing trick it takes. The Order then will have several spies in LV's camp. Nikkalmati justcarol >What, then, can he do? Does anyone think that he can, as a reward for >killing Dumbledore, ask for an assignment that doesn't involve >anything so crude as an Unforgiveable Curse, Nikkalmati: I think unfortunately much of what happens to SS will not occur on stage. We will hear about some of it, but not be witnesses. Harry and friends will be the focus. I find it very believable that SS will not have to do any "wet work". He is in a position to become a consigliere, a "trusted" advisor, and as long as he doesn't slip up he can pick his jobs. Who else can LV rely on? We haven't seen much in the way of brains on his side. SS will need a mediator to communicate with the Order. I doubt the Order will be convinced to trust him. Maybe Lupin or Minerva or Dobby will be convinced through some communication left by DD. (If DD is alive in some form, I doubt the portrait will speak). I sometimes imagine HG will put 2 and 2 together and be convinced he must be on the Order's side. He may have to use Fawlks, if available. A patronus does not convey much information I fear. He may help collect or give information on horcruxes. I picture Bill as helping with their destruction. Nikkalmati Ideas, anyone? What do you think Snape will be up to, mostly off page, >in Book 7? Surely all those revelations about him in HBP don't lead to >a dead end on the tower. Nikkalmati: Yes, he has had a lot of face time in the series. JKR can't drop him now. He will play a key role somewhere. If he is DDM, Harry will have to have a major change of heart during Book 7 as regards SS. I see this development as one of the major events of the book. I hope it doesn't require SS's death to accomplish it. Nikkalmati (hoping SS lives to become headmaster of Hogwarts. At least he won't have to teach) ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> You can search right from your browser? It?s easy and it?s free. See how. _Click Here!_ (http://us.click.yahoo.com/_7bhrC/NGxNAA/yQLSAA/s4wxlB/TM) --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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_R EAD Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 02:54:38 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 02:54:38 -0000 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152065 -> "bigdaddy999197" wrote: > In the first description of Hermione JKR seems to make it a point that > Hermione is rather plain. Then again she describes the reaction to her > appearance when the boys saw her dressed for the ball. The word I > would use is surprised. So maybe it is a matter of the ugly duckling > maturing into a beautiful swan. She has said little more about > Hermione's appearance since so I don't know if she wants to go so far > as to put the idea in our heads that she is beautiful so much as she > is saying she is not ugly. > Angie again: I'm sure Victor liked what he saw and Harry was obiously impressed, but I think Ron has always seen her that way. To most though, her appearance at the ball must've been quite a transformation b/c one of the Patil twins looked at her in "unflattering disbelief." I get the impression that the swan is much more ordinary looking when she's not all dolled up, which I think is great. I agree with your comment below that there is too much emphasis on looks. Therefore, I like the fact that Hermione has had not one, but three guys interested in her -- guys who are not bookworms like her, but of very different personalities and backgrounds. > "bigdaddy999197" wrote:> > In a similar vein I have always thought Emma Watson was miscast in the movies for that reason. She is a dynamite actress and has very much become Hermione, but she was a pretty young girl and is growing into a beautiful young woman. Despite her impressive acting skills I wonder if privately Emma was what JKR had in mind when it came to casting. I think she was trying to make a very important point with the character. Angie again: Yeah, a lot of fans of the books think they sold out when they cast Ms. Watson because she is very pretty, although in a girl-next-door kinda of way (not in a veela kind of way). They also softened her character, I think. She's not quite as obnoxious in the movies. But I sure couldn't see anyone else as Hermione now. "bigdaddy999197" wrote:> That there is too much emphasis put on looks. Hermione is a very attractive girl but it has nothing to do with looks. It is a point most boys of an age that would read Harry Potter miss. > Angie here: Sadly, I agree with you, but I wonder what those boys think of Ron's, Victor's, and McClaggen's attraction to Hermione? From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 03:06:53 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 03:06:53 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" > wrote: > > > <> > > > > 8) I also wonder if Ginny has had to endure other people making > > comments similar to the one Ron never got to finish? Ginny pulled > > her wand at the precise moment before Ron called her whatever he > was > > going to call her. Not that it makes her a slut, but Ginny is > pretty > > and popular and at age 15, is with her second boyfriend. > > Allie: > > I know others have said this, but I really think the "Ginny is a > slut" idea is VERY overblown. I almost wonder if fan chatter was > the reason that JKR put that argument into the book. Two boyfriends > in two years is NOTHING for a 15-year-old girl. And what is Ginny > supposed to have done with these boys that makes her a slut? I'm > SURE that JKR has not written Harry's love interest as someone who's > sleeping around at age 15! > Angie here: I don't think Ginny is a slut, but can you see how Ron would see it? He tends to be overprotective of the women he loves. Look how many times he has stood up for Hermione. He seems to almost aways react before Harry when Hermione is insulted. And it bothered him because he though Rita Skeeter made Hermione look like a "scarlet woman" when she falsely wrote about how Hermione was stringing Harry and Victor along. I think for Ron, the fact that Ginny let herself be seen in a corridor kissing a boy (who wasn't Harry) is enough to make him worry that people will call her a slut. I don't think Ron thinks of her as a slut; he's just worried others will. Angie wrote: > > JKR could have given Ginny any temperament that she wanted to, but > > she made her spunky and yes, sometimes, angry. I prefer to think > > there is a reason for this other than merely matching Harry with > > someone who has a strong personality: Could it be that this scene > > foreshadows that Ginny may be able to perform an Unforgiveable > Curse > > and "mean it" (something Harry has yet to pull off)? > > > Allie: > > Ooh, I like the idea of Ginny's angry/mean streak being useful in a > defense situation. I'm not sure I want her to use an unforgivable > curse, but maybe something powerful enough to knock a few death > eaters out when it's desperately needed. > Angie again: Well, like it or not, I think things are going to get pretty nasty in the final book. I don't see how they could not. Voldemort and the DEs are going to become even more desperate and ruthless as time goes by and the Order and whoever else is helping Harry are going to have to defend themselves, and that will probably require something more than a well-placed bat-bogey hex or two. Why is it OK for Harry to kill LV but not for Ginny to perform an Unforgiveable if it is necessary to save someone's life? Is it really considered Dark Magic under those circumstances? From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed May 10 03:14:10 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 03:14:10 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152067 > Ceridwen, > > I thought he was being snide to her, since she doesn't like her given > name. This is a way to get at Tonks. But it shows that he does know > her outside of class, since he can make that sort of dig. Potioncat: DD also calls her by her given name. No, I don't think Snape is doing it as a dig...unless there's sort of jealousy going on here...I think he's used to calling her by name. So far the only other people we've seen him address by given name is Draco, Igor, Narcissa and Bellatrix. (uses her full name too.)I think he also refers to Lucius by name, but I could be wrong. He would have taught her, but you'd think he'd call her Miss Tonks if that was the extent of it. She could have been in his House. Her House was very carefully avoided when she talked about her school days in OoP. Or perhaps Severus also knew Andromeda well. Which brings up the fact that no one is the right age for the generations to happen the way they do. From puduhepa98 at aol.com Wed May 10 04:48:32 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 00:48:32 EDT Subject: Sportsmanship -Triwizard Tournament Message-ID: <3f8.1f3e7b1.3192caa0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152068 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > a_svirn: Magical contracts in effect make hostages out of champions, completely at the mercy of the hosts and the jury and pretty much everyone else. The question is therefore WHY did Dumbledore feel it necessary to introduce them? > To include one rule that renders all the other rules defunct? >Tonks: >I am not aware that it is DD who sets the rules for the Tri-wizard >Tournament. I thought they were very old rules that can not be >changed. Rules that perhaps only a few totally understand. I wonder >if part of the game isn't to figure out the rules as one goes. The >Tri-wizard Tournament is like the Olympics. It is a very old game >and has its own rules written long ago. Unlike the Olympics the .rules are magical rules and enforcing on all that come after. They >can not be changed or updated. a_svirn: The Tournament is above all a very dangerous game. There have been deaths in the past, champions and spectators having been slain during the proceedings. If Dumbledore consented to host such an event without even perfectly understanding its rules he was either the world's most irresponsible person or senile. As for being one who sets the rules ? he did set the age limit rule. Could have abolished magical contracts if he wanted to. Nikkalmati: The WW is a dark and dangerous place full of powers no one can control and mysteries no one understands. DD is a wise and powerful wizard but even he cannot change the ancient magic. The age rule was made for safety of the participants by the heads of the schools and the Ministry. The only one who cheated in the choosing of Harry was Crouch Jr.and no one was able to discern who did it, how he did it or how to counteract it. DD for sure did not want Harry to participate and everyone could see a plot to kill Harry was the most likely explanation. I could argue that there were no more attempts at cheating than one would see in a World Cup or the Olympics or the Darby or the World Series etc. - it is human nature. Harry rejects Bagman's blatant attempts to help him and Hermione is shocked "He shouldn't be doing that!" said Hermione, looking very shocked. . . . . Well, I don't think Dumbledore would like it if he knew Bagman was trying to persuade you to cheat!" GOF 448 (US paperback ed.). Maybe this reaction by HP and HG is because they were raised in the Muggle world? Harry was not given full marks for his task and it did not make him win. It was one task and he accomplished it. He was late but so was Cedric. We are trying to make a judgment based on very little knowledge of the scoring system. Canon tells us that "most" of the judges agreed on the awarding of these points to Harry. Id at 507. IMO you cannot point to the awarding of these points as a clear cut example of cheating (by the judges no less) or say that because there is some discretion that there are no rules. It has already been pointed out that Krum lost points by the way he retrieved his egg, causing the dragon to crush her other eggs. Is that a moral judgment or skill? I assume DD planned out and set up the tasks. Perhaps he considered that the underwater task was not well drawn up. BTW Harry, based on his experience in the WW, was not foolish in supposing that the hostages were in real danger; Fleur certainly feared for her sister and Fleur was in real danger in the maze. Nikkalmati >Betsy Hp: >We do see this time and time again. The WW is the epitome of unfair, >where the rules apply differently depending on who you are. Sometimes >the unfairness works in Harry's favor, sometimes it doesn't. The good >thing about Harry, is that he (for the most part) does recognize when >he's been given an unfair advantage. Not all the time. But he has >still managed to maintain a basic sense of fairplay. Nikkalmati: I have to agree with this comment. We cannot judge the JKR WW by our standards. It is a reflection of our world with one foot in the Middle Ages and all the dark elements turned out for display. >Betsy Hp: >But it does bother me that Harry has to win any competition he >enters. If he'd lost the water event, if his team had lost the >quidditch championship, it would have been more interesting. It >wouldn't have effected the over-arching plot at all, but it would >have given Harry a bit more character depth to play with, IMO. Nikkalmati: Harry does tend to win all the time, but it sure doesn't feel like it! It is never easy for him and he doesn't assume he will come out ahead. He usually suffers a great deal physically and mentally for every "win". I can't say that the books would be better if Harry didn't always win. Its tough enough on Harry right now.! BTW he didn't win the water event, Cedric did. Nikkalmati ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Everything you need is one click away. Make Yahoo! your home page now. _Click Here!_ (http://us.click.yahoo.com/AHchtC/4FxNAA/yQLSAA/s4wxlB/TM) --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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_R EAD 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 tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed May 10 04:56:40 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 04:56:40 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152069 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > Excpet for DD and Tonks, we've only seen kids conjure a Patronus and so far no one seems to have planned out the form. I think (for what it's worth) that the Patronus is whatever it is, just like the > Animagus form. > (Snip) > > JKR said a Patronus was resistent to evil. Only the Order >members know how to use the Patronus as a message. > Tonks: I just checked at Lexicon and it says that the word means Patron like in a patron Saint. It also said that they are usually an animal. So I am wondering if they are like a power animal that Native American Shaman use? I sometimes think of the WW as the spirtual world. The world of the Shaman and the world of the wizard are much the same, I think. If we look at a Patronus as a power animal, like a power animal it protects the wizard. I know that one's power animal just appears. It is, I think, a part of owns own subconcious mind and has deep meaning to the person. Others may not know what that meaning is. In fact, I think a Shaman is not to tell others what the animal is. It is a very private part of the Shaman that assist and protects the Shaman when he/she travels to the lower and upper worlds, in other words to the spirtual world. Like the patronus I don't think that the power animal changes. I could be wrong, but I don't think that the power animal and the animal that the Shaman shape-shifts into is the same. (Mine are different. Not that I know that much about all of it. I took a few classes and did some journeying a few years back.) I don't know if helps us understand the Patronus or not. It might help to wonder what the otter means to Hermione. Don't they have big teeth? Maybe there is a connection there to Hermione's teeth and her parents the Dentists. As to how that protects her, only Hermione knows. I think that one must have a feeling of comfort and fearlessness when the patronus is there. (My power animal gave me that feeling.) Tonks_op From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed May 10 05:16:13 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 22:16:13 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: References: <700201d40605091548u6f787fefl14682a254939a894@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <700201d40605092216n5e5db2c4o6a1f30ba70740245@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152070 > > Kemper earlier: > > > ... I tried to get Snape to fall under a Randian Hero but can't get > past the emotional restraint nor the handsomeness pre-req. Though I > suppose it could be said that Snape's handsomeness doesn't need to be > physical, but that's weak. > > > Carol responded: > Most of the time (with notable foaming-at-the-mouth exceptions), Snape > *is* emotionally restrained. See his conversation with Draco in "The > Unbreakable Vow," for example, or his handling of Harry in the > Occlumency lessons (until Harry invades his privacy by entering the > Pensieve, that is). > > As for Snape's looks, I think that the Harry filter plays a part in > the descriptions we're presented. When we see Snape in the objectively > narrated "Spinner's End," we have Snape's "curtains of black hair" and > his sallow complexion, but no mention of an "overlarge" nose or yellow > teeth. (Roman noses used to be associated with aristocracy, and many > people find them attractive.) Clearly Snape isn't monstrously ugly or > Narcissa would not have held his hand, put her face close to his, or > shed tears on his chest. (No, I'm not advocating ACID POPS here.) And > he does have other attractions, which I think he has deliberately > cultivated to overcome the skinny little nerd image from his teenage > years, notably his studied movements and modulated voice, as well as a > style of speaking (which we first encounter in "The Potions Master" in > SS/PS) that marks him as an educated, cultivated man. Even though I'm > emphatically not a Snape/Narcissa shipper, I can see someone like her > finding the adult Snape attractive. (As for Lily, it's impossible to say.) > > Kemper now: But Snape isn't clearly attractive, even without the Harry filter. Sallow is hardly a flattering comment. Maybe Narcissa needed a good cry, and Snape was more compassionate (?!) than Bella, comparatively. I'm willing to agree that's he's not too ugly, maybe even average, but the support seems lacking with regards to an attractive Snape. (I, too, am not promoting ACID POPS). Snape doesn't seem emotionally restrained to me. He seems like he could come undone at any moment, that he's barely holding on to his emotions. If he was emotionally restrained, I would think his disdain for anyone would be so subtle that it would not be obvious to the reader and therefore, to Harry. Kemper, thanking Carol for clarifying his mistaken thoughts/writings for attributing the Romantic Hero hero of Ron to Betsy instead of Pippin, and apologizing to both of them. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 10 09:02:27 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 09:02:27 -0000 Subject: The TWT - a peculiar event In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152072 > Geoff: > > > On the question of the binding contract, we know little or nothing > of its raison d'?tre; this seems to be lost in the mediaeval mists > surrounding the first tournaments. However, we cannot just shrug > off the contract with a casual "Why didn't Dumbledore cancel it?" > We know of the existence of vows which cannot be reversed or > cancelled ? the Unbreakable Vow for example - so it is possible that, > for some reason, the tournament is covered by something similar. > a_svirn: Well, I don't suppose that folks in the WW going about making unbreakable vows every day, don't you? You'd need a *very* good reason to make one. Not for nothing we've been spending months after months in order to puzzle out what Snape's reason might have been. And I simply don't see why the organisers of the TWT saw fit to subject champions to that shabby trick. Just because there was a precedent in the thirteenth century? Rather insufficient grounds, I'd say. If tournament is "covered by something similar" to UV, then they probably shouldn't have revived it, should they? It had been in abeyance for centuries and good riddance! There was no need to go to such length in order to foster international friendships. A few friendly Quiddtich matches would have done the trick just fine. Of course Rowling would have had to think of some other plot device... From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 10 09:52:29 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 09:52:29 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152073 Let me add my voice to the admiring chorus! Brilliant synopsis and really thought provoking questions, Carol! Carol: 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on Everlasting Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's aspersions and Madam Pince's grasping hands. Is he just using the Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? How might this new interest in Potions, if it lasts, play out in Book 7? a_svirn: That's just what has been bothering me for some time. It seems that with magic you can acquire the skill mechanically, without properly understanding what is involved and what it is all about. And it's just doesn't seem right somehow. OK for potions, you just have to follow the recipe to make one. As with cooking it is possible to make an edible dish this way, even if you'd never make a great chef (or even a decent cook) if all you do is forever following instructions to the letter. Of course you'd need to understand the underling principles of Potions to *create* something, but not everyone is supposed to be creative. With spells, however, it seems that all you need is to know the incantation and to be powerful enough to pull it off. And it simply doesn't make sense to me. In the earlier books it seemed that your *intention* was the hub of the matter. "You need to mean it" as Bellatrix put it. And it wasn't only about the Unforgivables. You need to imagine something ridiculous in order to defeat a boggart. You need to focus on a really powerful memory to banish a Dementor. You need to concentrate hard of the thing you want to summon with Accio, etc. Yet in HBP it is enough for Harry to say an incitation and to wave his wand ? et voila! Mission accomplished. This is something inherently wrong about this sort of thing, I feel. And it brings us back to the question of leaning from the Prince. I suppose Hermione, should she were a fortunate owner of the Prince's book would have indeed learned something useful. I wouldn't put it past her to use it in order to get better marks. In fact, she would have probably feel entirely justified to do so, since *she* would not simply follow the instructions. *She* would be using it as a source of learning, not just some sort of a crib sheet. But Harry did not *learn* anything, in a sense that he did not gain any *knowledge*. He just memorized incantations and didn't even bother to look the words up in a dictionary. That kind of cheapens the very idea of education. If you don't need skill and understanding, then you don't really need to learn. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 11:38:07 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 11:38:07 -0000 Subject: Another Snape thread In-Reply-To: <68.69026d1c.3192a994@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152074 > Nikkalmati: > Yes, he has had a lot of face time in the series. JKR can't drop him now. > He will play a key role somewhere. If he is DDM, Harry will have to have a > major change of heart during Book 7 as regards SS. I see this development as > one of the major events of the book. I hope it doesn't require SS's death to > accomplish it. > Only, IMO, if SNAPE first has a profound change of heart about HARRY, including a profound and genuine apology for his abuse of Harry and Neville. Anything else would, IMO, constitute a reprehensible failure on JKR's part, amounting to an approval of the abuse of children. I would also caution against assuming that Snape will have a key role to play based only on his "face time." I tend to agree that he does have an important role to play, but JKR does sometimes have a way of introducing characters, building them up, and then dropping them into the background. Consider Lupin, for instance, who has been nothing more than an umbrella stand for two books now, or Luna, or Neville, or Tonks. Lupinlore From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 11:28:18 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 11:28:18 -0000 Subject: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152075 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Don L." wrote: > > > This is the fate of Snape. IMO, his actions will play a key part in > the destruction of LV, but his success could only have occurred with > his perceived part in the death and sacrifice of Dumbledore. His > part in Dumbledore's death will add to his conflicted character and > will drive his actions. Until the end, Harry and the rest will > misunderstood and doubt every thing Snape does, almost to their own > ruin. Yet in the end Snape's actions and probable sacrifice while > not decisive, will clear the path for Harry to defeat LV. It may well > be the final scene where Harry realizes Snape's sacrifice and > redemption rather than Harry's defeat of LV that most will find the > most memorable and satisfying of book seven. > Ahh, but only if there IS true redemption. And simply being a part of the fall of LV, even instrumental in the fall of LV, is nowhere good enough, IMO. Only a profound and genuine repentance on Snape's part of his abuse of Harry and Neville, meaning a profound and genuine apology, can constitute redemption. Absent that, any part he plays in the fall of Voldemort would be, IMO, totally irrelevant. Lupinlore From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed May 10 11:49:30 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 11:49:30 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152076 > 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on Everlasting > Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's aspersions and > Madam Pince's grasping hands. > 4) We later learn that Madam Pince is not the only person listening > behind the shelves: Draco is there as well. Potioncat: Wonderful summary and questions. Right now I only have time for one, so here goes: Isn't it hard to believe that Draco and Madam Pince both were standing so close to the Trio they could each hear? While it isn't out of character for Madam Pince to go crazy over the mistreatment of books, grabbing the book seems unlike her. I would think she'd have a few spells up her sleeve for saving books from careless students. She did a pretty good of using magic when she chased Ginny and Harry out of the lbirary once before. I think we saw Draco!Pince. Think about it. Draco was researching for his mission. He wouldn't want to be seen by Snape or anyone else. So when he knew Madam Pince would be busy elsewhere....Filch's office?...answering questions from other Slytherins?... He slugged down Polyjuice and went looking for his information. If he also heard that Harry was getting tips from some Half Blood Prince, he might have decided to grab the book as well. Potioncat, who thinks the real Madam Pince was trying to convince Crabbe and Goyle that a Table of Contents was not a magical piece of furniture that could tell them the answers to homework questions. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed May 10 13:05:40 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 13:05:40 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152077 SSSusan: Lots of fun in this chapter. Thanks, Carol, for your hard work and thoughtful questions! Carol: > 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with > Lavender and Hermione's reaction? SSSusan: PDAs bug the crap out of me, frankly. But in a book, the episodes are rather funny (especially the plunger sound effect one). I am not surprised they make Hermione miserable. From descriptions, it would be extremely difficult to ignore them! > 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but > Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's > plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, > potioning him? SSSusan: I'm with Harry on this one! In fact, I'm rather shocked that Hermione makes this claim. Just think about Merope and Tom; the consequences can be pretty ghastly. I'm sure Romilda (and many of her friends at that age) just thought it was a fairly innocent little ploy, but it really is a *violation,* imo. I can't imagine how pissed I'd be if someone I was NOT attracted to or interested in used a Love Potion on me and I ended up... erm... doing things I'd never intended or wanted to do with that person. Yick! > And how responsible are the twins...? SSSusan: I avoid Twins threads almost at all cost. I adore them too much to start discussing their possible culpability/negligence/legal responsibility for the outcome of the use of their product. ;-) > 3) Is he just using the Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't > deserve, or is he really learning more from the Prince than he ever > learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? SSSusan: A very interesting question. In some ways I do think Harry is getting marks he doesn't deserve, as he's displaying a brilliance which *isn't* really his. OTOH, *if* he is actually digesting the Prince's notes, *if* he is truly learning what the Prince has written, and not just using them like a recipe, then it's not totally undeserved. Does that make sense? If he's LEARNING and RETAINING the material, then he is becoming a better Potions student and potionmaker. If he's not really digesting and retaining those marginal notes, then it feels more like cheating. Carol: > 5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in > love? Is Harry right? SSSusan: It might be fun if he were right, and I wouldn't be surprised. What I liked about this little scene is that it was *Harry,* not Hermione, who suggested the two might be in love. He isn't exactly super- attuned to romantic relationships normally, it seems to me. :-) > 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? SSSusan: I think because it felt EASY. With all those girls following him, giggling, trying to *get* him to take them, there stands Luna, unassuming, oblivious, just HERSELF. I think to Harry that just seemed like a relief. And he was SMART enough to say "just as friends" right off the bat. (Yay, Harry!) No worries about wrong assumptions, no pressures, no game-playing. I thought it was an excellent idea. > What does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or contrasted > with Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? SSS: That Harry's not into playing games the way Hermie is. > Do you agree with Harry that Hermione got what she deserved when > Cormac ambushed her under the mistletoe? Why or why not? SSS: Oh dear. The issue of Hermione & comeuppance again. Not touching with a 10-foot pole. > 7) And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along > with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star pupil, > Severus Snape? SSSusan: This question fascinates me. Why, indeed?? Is there any chance that Slughorn is aware Trelawney has made a couple of true prophecies? Otherwise, I can't fathom her inclusion on the guest list. But how would Slughorn have become aware of her important prophecies? > 7) Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? > Why or why not? SSSusan: None at all. Can't imagine any reason *to* have felt sympathy, frankly. > 9) Draco's appearance suggests that he's suffering from stress or > insomnia. Do you think that he was really too ill to play Quidditch > (previous chapter)? SSSusan: I do think his health is suffering, but I think the "too ill to play Quidditch" was a lie. Frankly, I think things for Draco have turned VERY SERIOUS, and he just doesn't care about things which don't carry as much import as his mission... such as Quidditch or Prefect duties. Can't say I blame him, actually; that behavior makes perfect sense to me, given the stakes. > 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or > "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? SSSusan: That, as usual, there's too much there in Snape that we readers aren't yet supposed to know. Also, perhaps, that Harry just is no damn good at reading Snape. ;-) > Why does Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? SSSusan: Because there's no way Draco is going to let him follow him? Because he wants to get back to keeping his eye on Potter? > Carol, thanking Penapart Elf, Siriusly Snapey Susan, and Potioncat > for their comments and suggestions Siriusly Snapey Susan, happy to comment and suggest! :-) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed May 10 13:37:31 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 13:37:31 -0000 Subject: Snape & Slughorn considering Harry (was: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152078 Ceridwen: > I think Snape is the pessimist to Slughorn's optimist, he only sees > the bad, while Slughorn seems to only see the good in the students > that he favors. Snape might have noticed more of Harry's > abilities - and he does have abilities since he got an EE on his > O.W.L.s - if he allowed himself to notice. If Slughorn was > not so enthusiastic toward his `prize', he might wonder why there's > such a disconnect between the Harry in his class and the one Snape > claims in his class. SSSusan: Heh heh. And I can't resist adding that if *Snape* were not so enthusiastic about his loathing of Harry, he might also have asked himself, "Why is this kid apparently actually LEARNING and performing well in Slughorn's class?" I've always said a little self-evaluation of his performance as a teacher would be in order for Snape. Might've been nice if he'd realized it, too. ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 16:36:50 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:36:50 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152079 Tonks wrote: > I just checked at Lexicon and it says that the word means Patron > like in a patron Saint. It also said that they are usually an > animal. So I am wondering if they are like a power animal that > Native American Shaman use? > > I could be wrong, but I don't think that the power animal and the > animal that the Shaman shape-shifts into is the same. (Mine are > different. Not that I know that much about all of it. I took a few > classes and did some journeying a few years back.) > > I don't know if helps us understand the Patronus or not. It might > help to wonder what the otter means to Hermione. I think that one must have a feeling of comfort and fearlessness when the patronus is there. Carol responds: JKR says that the Patronus is a spirit guardian, which more or less conforms with what the Lexicon says. "Patronus" was a Medieval Latin word for "patron saint" and was derived from "pater" (father). It's doubly appropriate, given the etymology, that Harry's spirit guardian is his father, or rather, his father's Animagus form. I would venture to say that the Patronus, which is an individual's protector, is different from his Animagus form (which would exist in potential even if never developed or discovered), which represents himself. (Sirius Black *is* in many respects a big black dog, or rather, he has a strong affinity with large black dogs and with the Dog Star he's named after. Neither the color of the dog nor its resemblance to a Grim is coincidental. His Patronus, however, would not have been a dog. What it would have been, I can't guess, any more than I can guess Harry's Animagus form if he had decided to become one.) It's true that all the Patronuses we've seen so far are animals, but I don't think we can conclude that they have to be. For all we know, Neville's Patronus could be a Mimbula Mimbletonia and Snape's could turn into Dumbledore (as opposed to whatever it was originally). I think that's unlikely but not impossible. I would guess, too, that a change in Patronuses is not all that uncommon as a young person reaches adulthood. Many of us are expecting Snape's Patronus to change into something associated with Dumbledore (e.g., a Phoenix or a bumblebee), but maybe it's Harry's Patronus that will change, from a stag representing his father to something representing his mother (a lily or a unicorn?) or a phoenix representing Dumbledore. (I don't want that to be the case; I hope it will be Snape's that changes. Just presenting it as a possibility.) Regarding Hermione's Patronus, which again represents her protective spirit and not her essential self, we know that otters are JKR's favorite animals, but that doesn't tell us much about Hermione. Someone mentioned a connection between otters and the Weasleys, which I think is on target. Weasels are related to otters (in the same family, possibly indicating that Hermione is a prospective Weasel, erm, Weasley) and the Weasleys live in or near Ottery St. Catchpole, again, surely not a coincidence. (FWIW, badgers, the symbol of Hufflepuff, and ferrets, into which a certain Slytherin was transfigured, are members of the same family, the mustelids.) It's interesting that Hermione's spirit guardian is an animal known for its playfulness when Hermione herself is so serious. Maybe that's part of her attraction to Ron; he has the sense of humor that she lacks but can appreciate. To stretch the point, maybe her otter Patronus *is* Ron in the same sense that Harry's stag Patronus is James: an otter is a playful weasel (with the admittedly irrelevant ability to swim). Which, of course, raises the question of what Ron's Patronus is. Does it somehow represent Hermione? Carol, noting that "otter" is "Potter" without the "P," which may or may not be coincidence From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 12:29:54 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 05:29:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: <700201d40605092216n5e5db2c4o6a1f30ba70740245@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060510122954.48312.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152080 Kemper wrote: But Snape isn't clearly attractive, even without the Harry filter. Sallow is hardly a flattering comment. Maybe Narcissa needed a good cry, and Snape was more compassionate (?!) than Bella, comparatively. I'm willing to agree that's he's not too ugly, maybe even average, but the support seems lacking with regards to an attractive Snape. (I, too, am not promoting ACID POPS). Snape doesn't seem emotionally restrained to me. He seems like he could come undone at any moment, that he's barely holding on to his emotions. If he was emotionally restrained, I would think his disdain for anyone would be so subtle that it would not be obvious to the reader and therefore, to Harry. Joe: Snape is, in my regional phrase, as ugly as a busted blister. Greasy hair, yellow teeth, sallow skin. Yeah Harry doesn't like Snape but that doesn't mean he doesn't get an accurate view of him. Harry also doesn't like Draco but few think Draco is ugly based on Harry's POV. I'm talking about canon Snape, not Alan Rickman or fanfic Snape. He is more than likely axe fight without the axe ugly. Doesn't mean anything to the storyline. Some people are just less attractive than others and I don't see how it makes them less of a good or bad guy if they are ugly. Why would we accept that Hermione was pretty at the Yule Ball from Harry's POV and not accept Harry's POV about Snape? Snape may be redeemed at the end but trying to redeem his looks is a bit much I think. Saying Snape is more compassionate than Bella isn't really saying much, is it? I mean after Voldemort she's number two on the evil/crazy hit parade, right? Joe From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Wed May 10 16:51:22 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:51:22 -0000 Subject: Second Task points Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152081 I could never figure out why the second task in book 4 was considered five times as important as the first, the most points you could get in the first task was 10, in the second it was 50. For that matter in Quidditch why do you get 10 point for scoring a goal and 150 for catching the snitch, why not 1 and 15? Eggplant From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed May 10 16:58:59 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:58:59 -0000 Subject: Second Task points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > I could never figure out why the second task in book 4 was considered > five times as important as the first, the most points you could get in > the first task was 10, in the second it was 50. For that matter in > Quidditch why do you get 10 point for scoring a goal and 150 for > catching the snitch, why not 1 and 15? > > Eggplant > Geoff: It isn't considered five times as important. It's the same: '"It's marks out of ten from each one," Ron said... (GOF "The First Task" p.314 UK edition) Harry, for example, scores: Maxime-Crouch-Dumbledore-Bagman-Karkaroff = 8-9-9-10-4 hence a total of 40. In the second task, we do not see the individual scoring; Bagman merely announced the aggregate figures. With regard to Quidditch scores being odd, have a look at tennis scores..... :-) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 17:50:49 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 17:50:49 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152083 Carol asked: > > 7) Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? Why or why not? > SSSusan responded: > None at all. Can't imagine any reason *to* have felt sympathy, frankly. Carol again: Ah, well, I had to cut a lot from the synopsis, including the details that made me feel sympathy for Snape. Slughorn kept saying things like "I don't think even you, Severus--," making Harry sound like a Potions genius who was more brilliant than Teen!Snape when it was young Severus whose marginal notes he was using to get those brilliant results. Unfair! And to top it off, Slughorn credits Harry's supposed exceptional ability to a genetic inheritance from Lily, again shunting Snape into second place, as if he's less brilliant at Potions than Harry's dead mother, which I doubt given what we've seen of Snape's aptitude for the subject. (There's no suggestion that the notes in the Potions book are anyone's but the HBP's, and we've already seen Snape's exceptional abilities illustrated with the Wolfsbane Potion, among other evidence.) Interestingly, even the narrator (and Harry?) seemed to empathize for a moment with Snape, referring to him as "trapped" as Slughorn puts an arm around him and drags him willy nilly into the conversation. (Poor Sevvy; he'd have preferred to "skulk"!) I *did* feel sorry for Snape, even on a first reading before I knew for sure that he was the Half-Blood Prince, because it seemed as if, once again, his brilliance wasn't being fully acknowledged and others were bing credited with his accomplishments. (We know that he's a Potions genius and Harry isn't; we don't know whether Lily's supposed natural ability matched Severus's and there's no evidence other than Slughorn's testimony, biased in her favor by his fond memories of her "cheek" and his guilt over her death, that her skill at Potions came anywhere near Severus's. I still think, based on Ollivander's remark about her first wand, that her forte was Charms, not Potions.) Of course, the irony that Harry really is learning from Snape via the notes he wrote as a teenager is delicious, but that doesn't undo the sense I felt that he was being shunted into the background, the former prodigy being pushed aside for the new one, who didn't even deserve his place and was taking credit for the old prodigy's discoveries. (Nothing against Harry, who wasn't doing it on purpose, and certainly wouldn't have used Severus's notes if he'd known whose they were. It's Slughorn whose conduct bothers me, as does he treatment of Ron.) I don't think that Snape felt sorry for *himself* or that he resented Slughorn's treatment of him. He seems more interested in the "exceptional" abilities he knows that Harry doesn't have. I doubt that he suspects the source of Harry's information at this point, but his suspicions are certainly aroused. I wonder if, as his eyes bore into Harry, he was using Occlumency on him. BTW, I also wonder whether Snape already knew that Harry intended to become an Auror and why JKR brought that brief exchange into the conversation. Surely if Snape is DDM, he would want Harry to have exactly those skills. Would Snape, if he had remained Potions master, have found a way to let Harry pursue that ambition despite the E on his OWL, or was that just one reason among half a dozen why DD gave Snape the DADA position at last? Carol, wondering why SSS saw no reason to sympathize with Snape in this scene From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 18:13:42 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 18:13:42 -0000 Subject: Second Task points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152084 Eggplant wrote: > For that matter in > Quidditch why do you get 10 point for scoring a goal and 150 for > catching the snitch, why not 1 and 15? Carol responds: I snipped the first part of your post regarding scoring in the TWT, which Geoff answered with his usual mastery of the canon. Regarding Quidditch scoring, possibly ten and 150 sound more impressive than one and fifteen? Or it's easier for the spectators to grasp scores expressed in round numbers? (Or for the math-challenged JKR to keep track of them? The magical scoreboard, of course, wouldn't care one way or the other.) Being behind by fifty points sounds more serious than being behind by five even though it amounts to the same thing (five goals). What bothers me is not the round numbers but the discrepancy between the points given to the Seeker and those given to the Chasers, whose job seems (to me) almost irrelevant--essentially, to keep the audience entertained until the Seeker catches the Snitch and ends the game, usually but not always winning it. (Krum's action in the QWC was highly unusual, which is why the Twins' anticipating it was so clever and ought to have paid off very well.) Fortunately for any suspense regarding the Quidditch Cup, cumulative points matter, and Harry has to wait until the Chasers have made a certain number of goals before catching the Snitch in the final game of the season. Still, the number of points allotted to the Seeker seems disproportionate. Just one reason among many why Quidditch is one of my least favorite parts of the books. No wonder JKR is tired of writing about it. Carol, who appreciated Luna's commentary in Harry's final game but would probably have grown tired of that, too From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed May 10 18:35:17 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 18:35:17 -0000 Subject: Feeling sympathy (or not) for Snape (was: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152085 SSS notes: I've rearranged a couple of Carol's comments for the sake of how I wanted to respond; hopefully it didn't upset the logic of the remarks or anything. Carol asked: > > > 7) Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? > > > Why or why not? SSSusan responded: > > None at all. Can't imagine any reason *to* have felt sympathy, > > frankly. Carol again: > Slughorn kept saying things like "I don't think even you, Severus-- > ," making Harry sound like a Potions genius who was more brilliant > than Teen!Snape when it was young Severus whose marginal notes he > was using to get those brilliant results. Unfair! And to top it > off, Slughorn credits Harry's supposed exceptional ability to a > genetic inheritance from Lily, again shunting Snape into second > place.... SSSusan: Yes, indeed, this all happened. I suppose I just didn't *feel* for Snape there. I mean, it was amusing to me that his talents were being rather ignored. Callous of me, I know. ;-) Carol: > Interestingly, even the narrator (and Harry?) seemed to empathize > for a moment with Snape, referring to him as "trapped" as Slughorn > puts an arm around him and drags him willy nilly into the > conversation. (Poor Sevvy; he'd have preferred to "skulk"!) SSSusan: Hee. Yes, I'm sure he'd have preferred skulking to doing *any*thing willy nilly! But again, the truth is that I simply didn't commiserate with a "trapped" Severus. Slughorn tends to trap all kinds of people in his embrace (figuratively, like those he corraled into his train compartment, or literally, like Snape under his bulky arm), and I guess I focused more on Slughorn being at it again than I did on how the recipient felt about it. Which, come to think about it, is interesting... as I definitely felt for Ginny, squirming uncomfortably (IIRC) when she'd been been tapped for her outstanding bat bogey hex. Carol: > I don't think that Snape felt sorry for *himself* or that he > resented Slughorn's treatment of him. I doubt that he suspects the source of Harry's information at > this point, but his suspicions are certainly aroused. SSSusan: I also don't think Snape felt sorry for himself, though I think he might have been *annoyed* at Slughorn's treatment... or perhaps annoyed by his obtuseness in not grasping that there was something fishy about Potter's outstanding potions performance. (I too believe that Snape *was* suspicious, more than puzzled, by the report.) Carol: > I *did* feel sorry for Snape, even on a first reading before I knew > for sure that he was the Half-Blood Prince, because it seemed as if, > once again, his brilliance wasn't being fully acknowledged and > others were bing credited with his accomplishments. > > Carol, wondering why SSS saw no reason to sympathize with Snape in > this scene SSSusan: In all honesty, I think the difference is that I felt no *empathy* for Snape in this scene, and so therefore I also felt no sympathy. I think you (Carol) tend to feel *empathy* for Severus Snape, and so it's more likely that you will also have a sympathetic response. I'm just an old meanie when it comes to Snape. ;-) I mean, I'm convinced he's DDM!, and I find him a fascinating person, but I definitely don't like the guy. I *might* by the end of Book 7, but that's TBD. So when I read about him being given a bit of a hard time, I tend to think things like, "See how it feels??" Consider his treatment of Harry as a contrast. Honestly, Harry did NOT display outstanding skill in Snape's classes, but Snape frequently belittled him, humiliated him, above all others. He clearly did not credit Harry for the skills he possessed or the work he did accomplish. So, again, I find it rather amusing when Snape's own skills & accomplishments are... "underacknowledged," shall we say? Siriusly Snapey Susan From lauciricad at yahoo.com Wed May 10 16:39:41 2006 From: lauciricad at yahoo.com (Don L.) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:39:41 -0000 Subject: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152086 Lupinlore writes on the potential for Snape redemption, "Ahh, but only if there IS true redemption. And simply being a part of the fall of LV, even instrumental in the fall of LV, is nowhere good enough, IMO. Only a profound and genuine repentance on Snape's part of his abuse of Harry and Neville, meaning a profound and genuine apology, can constitute redemption. Absent that, any part he plays in the fall of Voldemort would be, IMO, totally irrelevant." I agree, yet do not expect Snape to come close to redemption or repentance in terms of his treatment of Harry, Neville or I suspect many other young wizards is has abused over the years. My arguement is less personal and more focused on redemption in terms of the larger quest. I believe he will be redeemed in terms of the current view of Harry and the wizarding community - that is Snape as a murderer and probable deatheater. I fall into the camp that Snape is Dumbledore's man. I don't believe Dumbledore or Snape anticipated the actual events leading to the death of Dumbledore, but they both new and anticipated that either might die in order to further the destruction of LV, even perhaps by their own hand. IMO, Snape new this as he caused the death of Dumbledore. Snape would had to have known how this act would be viewed and the danger he would be subjected (Death, Azkaban) and what additonal actions he would have to accomplish for Dumbledore's death to have had a purpose. IMO, if I am correct, he has already acted heroically and redeemed himself. This may not appease all, but I believe Harry once he understands the reason for Snape's actions and Dumbledore's death will believe Snape entirely redeemed regardless of past abuse. Love Snape, admire Snape as person, perhaps never. Understand him as a hero, IMHO Harry and wisarding community will indeed. Don L. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed May 10 20:19:36 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 20:19:36 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow -Bloody Seven In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152087 justcarol67 wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter > 15, The Unbreakable Vow. > > > Discussion Questions: > > 7) ... Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire > Sanguini as a party guest? > bboyminn: I'm afraid I'm just stating the obvious and a side note at best, but did everyone catch the subliminal reference to 'blood' in the vampires name 'Sanguini'? 'Sauguine' means the color of blood, and comes from the latin root /sanguis/ which means blood and /sanguineus/ which means bloody. Sorry, I don't have more to post on the subject at the moment. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed May 10 20:53:39 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 20:53:39 -0000 Subject: Second Task points In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152088 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Eggplant wrote: > > For that matter in > > Quidditch why do you get 10 point for scoring a goal and 150 > > for catching the snitch, why not 1 and 15? > > Carol responds: > I snipped the first part of your post regarding scoring in the TWT, > which Geoff answered with his usual mastery of the canon. > > Regarding Quidditch scoring, possibly ten and 150 sound more > impressive than one and fifteen? bboyminn: I think that fact that the Snitch is worth 150 points very clearly explains why individual goals are worth 10. If individual goals were worth only 1 point, there would hardly be any point in playing. The other players might just as well sit on the bench while the Seeker look for the Snitch. But, if it's 10 points then it is possible to score enough points that it doesn't matter who catches the Snitch. We see this in the World Cup, Viktor realizes his team can't win, but he can still salvage some dignity by catching the Snitch, which he does. Further, in Ginny's first game as Seeker, Ginny gets the Snitch but her team loses by 10 points (240 to 230, or something like that). If the Snitch doesn't appear early in the game, then the score can get quite high, and that means that the relative value of the Snitch becomes less, especially if one team is way ahead of the other. Sometimes the losing team can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat in the last minute by catching the Snitch, other times, the high scoring team is far enough ahead, that even catching the Snitch doesn't matter. However, all team points add up to the end of season Quidditch Cup, and that is worth something. Relative to the Quidditch Cup, I always wondered whether the House Cup and the Quidditch Cup were tied together. For example, are the Quidditch points added to the House points to determine the House Cup? > Carol responds: > > What bothers me is not the round numbers but the discrepancy > between the points given to the Seeker and those given to the > Chasers, whose job seems (to me) almost irrelevant--essentially, > to keep the audience entertained until the Seeker catches the > Snitch and ends the game, usually but not always winning it. bboyminn: If you remember your Quidditch history from 'Quidditch Through the Ages', then you know somewhere early on in Quidditch history, 1269, Barberus Bragge brought a caged Snidget (small bird) to the match and told the assembled players that he would award 150 galleons to the player who caught it during the course of the game. While this didn't go as planned since all the player ignored the game and chased the Snidget, it did lead to the introduction of the Seeker position and the awarding of 150 points. One hundred and fifty points to match the original 150 galleons that was offered. So, the 150 points is a traditional and histortical aspect of the game dating back to the year 1269. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Wed May 10 21:31:55 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 21:31:55 -0000 Subject: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152089 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Which, of course, raises the question of what Ron's Patronus is. Does it somehow represent Hermione? Steven1965aaa: Ron's Patronus is a dog, I think a Jack Russel Terrier (sp?). I'm not sure whether I'm remembering this from OOP or a JPK interview. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 22:42:02 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 22:42:02 -0000 Subject: Social Structure in the WW (was:Re: Hero types / Why Snape must...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152090 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > However, I'm not sure I'd say that Ron is the bottom of the > > social heap. His family is poor, but they're purebloods and > > very much connected to their society's powerbase. (The British > > social system rather than the American.) > > Actually, Hermione may better fit that particular discription. > > As a muggleborn she's certainly starting at the bottom. > >>Pippin: > I'm not sure pure blood counts as much as even purebloods would > like to think; otherwise it wouldn't matter to Lucius that Hermione > beat Draco in every exam. It's Ron who doesn't get invited to join > the Slug Club, and Ron is the one with the shabby clothes and the > despised "blood traitor' family. Betsy Hp: Ah, but Ron is yet another member of the "shabby aristocracy", while Hermione is a singing monkey. She's a novelty *because* she comes from such a low background. Or at least, that's the feeling I got from Slughorn. Lucius struck me as upset that *anyone* beat Draco. But that it was a mudblood doubled the shame. Which *does* suggest blood counts, IMO. I think Ernie knowing the exact level of his purebloodedness (nine generations, IIRC?) speaks to blood counting as well. (So did the students' "by the way" knowledge of which of their classmates were pure, and which were not.) And while the Weasleys are considered "blood traitors" by some in the WW, I get the sense that that's more a political moniker than anything else. "Dark wizards" versus "blood traitors" like "Labor" versus "Conservative", IOWs. (I posted those in no particular order, and in fact had to look up British political parties, so, no I'm not trying to make a political point. ) > >>Pippin: > Hermione, OTOH, always has all the spending money she needs, and > her parents are solidly middle class from what we can tell. She > hasn't grown up thinking of herself as underpriveleged, and she > really isn't treated that way in the WW. Betsy Hp: Money really doesn't count in this sort of social system, I think. Middle class Hermione is seen as being on the same level as the working class Creeveys and the upper class Justin. They are, all of them, muggleborn. And sure, it hasn't affected them while they're at Hogwarts (except for their inability to study to the same effect as their wizarding classmates over the holidays) but I'm near positive it will effect them when they go looking for work. Especially within the Ministry. (Though I also think people like Arthur Weasley are working hard to improve things for muggleborns. I suppose that would be the "blood traitor" party line. I'll also assume they have their own, less insulting, name for themselves.) Which is why I think it's to Hermione's advantage that she's befriended (and will possibly marry into) the Weasley family, and that she's been recruited by Slughorn. > >>Pippin: > Ron is. Betsy Hp: But not when it comes to finding a job I think. His family is well plugged in. Ron has a very definite advantage over Dean, for example. Ron is plugged into the system because of his social standing. I also suspect the WW mothers would rather their daughers bring home young Ron, with his blood and his network, than say Justin, who lacks such things. Remember, Voldemort's positions were popular when they first started out. The WW is xenophobic, and Ron is most definitly one of them. Muggleborns like Hermione, not so much. (Snipped the rest of Pippin's post, because I agree! ) Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 10 22:53:26 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 22:53:26 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow -Bloody Seven In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152091 Discussion Questions (Carol): > > > > 7) ... Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire Sanguini as a party guest? > > > Steve/bboyminn responded: > > I'm afraid I'm just stating the obvious and a side note at best, but > did everyone catch the subliminal reference to 'blood' in the vampires name 'Sanguini'? > > 'Sanguine' means the color of blood, and comes from the latin root > /sanguis/ which means blood and /sanguineus/ which means bloody. Carol again: Yes, I was hoping someone would catch that. But "sanguine" also means cheerful, or as Merriam-Webster Online puts it, "having blood as the predominating bodily humor; also: having the bodily conformation and temperament held characteristic of such predominance and marked by sturdiness, high color, and cheerfulness." If we need a character who fits this description, I'd vote for Ludo Bagman in his Quidditch-star days. Not that Sanguini has a sanguine disposition in this sense--in fact, he's the exact opposite--emaciated, pallid, and morose--but he's certainly a tame Vampire (much less scary than, say, a transformed Werewolf or a Banshee). Maybe he and his fellow Vampires need to feed on blood because they lack exactly the qualities present in a person with a sanguine disposition (rather like the Dementors feeding on cheerfulness but not so sinister)? Or it's just word play on JKR's part that poor Sanguini is the polar opposite of sanguine (and somewhat resembles a bloodless corpse in his pallor). Of course, she may simply be trying to place a holly stake in the heart of any lingering "Snape is a Vampire" theories. Carol, apologizing to the List Elves for a fourth post and wondering whether Sanguini likes blood-flavored lollipops From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu May 11 00:01:08 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 00:01:08 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow -Bloody Seven In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152092 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Discussion Questions (Carol): > > > > > > 7) ... Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire > Sanguini as a party guest? > > > > > > Steve/bboyminn responded: > > > > I'm afraid I'm just stating the obvious and a side note at best, > > but did everyone catch the subliminal reference to 'blood' in > > the vampires name 'Sanguini'? > > > > 'Sanguine' means the color of blood, and comes from the latin root > > /sanguis/ which means blood and /sanguineus/ which means bloody. > > > Carol again: > Yes, I was hoping someone would catch that. But "sanguine" also > means cheerful, or as Merriam-Webster Online puts it, "having > blood as the predominating bodily humor; also: having the bodily > conformation and temperament held characteristic of such > predominance and marked by sturdiness, high color, and > cheerfulness." If we need a character who fits this description, > I'd vote for Ludo Bagman in his Quidditch-star days. > > ...edited... > > Carol, apologizing to the List Elves for a fourth post and wondering > whether Sanguini likes blood-flavored lollipops > bboyminn: Yet, the relationship between sanguine as cheerful and blood is still there because 'cheerfullness' was related to an abundance of blood-humor. Humor in this case represents one of the four medievel 'essenses' that defind a person's physiology. Here is an extended definition from my American Heritage CD-ROM- "WORD HISTORY: Perhaps one has wondered what the connection between sanguinary, "bloodthirsty," and sanguine, "cheerfully optimistic," could be. The connection can be found in medieval physiology with its notion of the four humors (blood, bile, phlegm, and black bile). These four body fluids were thought to determine a person's temperament, or distinguishing mental and physical characteristics. Thus, if blood was the predominant humor, one had a ruddy face and a disposition marked by courage, hope, and a readiness to fall in love. Such a temperament was called sanguine, the Middle English ancestor of our word sanguine. ..." So sanguine is related to cheerful because 'cheerful' is related to blood-humor. But note that other variations of that word lose the 'cheerful' context. san?gui?nar?y - adj. 1. Accompanied by bloodshed. See Synonyms at bloody. 2. Eager for bloodshed; bloodthirsty. 3. Consisting of blood. san?guin?e?ous - adj. 1. Relating to or involving blood or bloodshed. See Synonyms at bloody. 2. Color. Having the color of blood; blood-red. san?guin?o?lent - adj. Mixed or tinged with blood. In my dictionary the reference to Sanguine as cheerful is third and follows the archaic reference to Sanguine as a blood-humor in medievel physiology. So, that aspect would seem to be minor, or at least, indirect. Still it's nice to see that someone caught it. Steve/bboyminn From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu May 11 00:03:55 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 00:03:55 -0000 Subject: Social Structure in the WW (was:Re: Hero types / Why Snape must...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152093 > > Betsy Hp: > Money really doesn't count in this sort of social system, I think. > Middle class Hermione is seen as being on the same level as the > working class Creeveys and the upper class Justin. They are, all of > them, muggleborn. And sure, it hasn't affected them while they're > at Hogwarts (except for their inability to study to the same effect > as their wizarding classmates over the holidays) but I'm near > positive it will effect them when they go looking for work. > Especially within the Ministry. Pippin: Will it? It sounds like you're describing the 19th century system of promotion satirized by Mark Twain and Gilbert & Sullivan, where blood was all and merit was nothing. But it sounds like this system has collapsed because otherwise Draco would have just rolled his eyes at Lucius's comment and said, "Yes, frightfully keen, I'm afraid." She wouldn't be a threat. Merit does count for something apparently. Malfoy and his ilk are reactionaries, not defenders of the status quo, IMO. They don't like the changes and want things back the way they were. It's possible that Percy abandoned his interest in muggleborn Penelope, and I've wondered myself whether Molly will really be pleased to put Muriel's tiara on Hermione's head, but Penelope's name suggests that Percy will come back to her eventually. Muggleborn males don't seem to have trouble finding mates, as far as I can see. Ted Tonks landed himself a pureblood and so did Tobias Snape. Pippin From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 00:58:06 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 00:58:06 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152094 > >>gelite67: [I think] > > JKR could have given Ginny any temperament that she wanted to, > > but she made her spunky and yes, sometimes, angry. I prefer to > > think there is a reason for this other than merely matching > > Harry with someone who has a strong personality: Could it be > > that this scene foreshadows that Ginny may be able to perform an > > Unforgiveable Curse and "mean it" (something Harry has yet to > > pull off)? > >>Allie: > Ooh, I like the idea of Ginny's angry/mean streak being useful in > a defense situation. > Betsy Hp: I really don't like the idea of Ginny's anger (which leads to her being fairly mean) as a positive. It doesn't make her strong. In fact, her rage seems to control her rather than the other way around. She was near tears in her argument with Ron (which signals a lack of control, IMO). And her meanness to Ron led to a rather big crises for her quidditch team and a major rift between Ron and Hermione. Neither of which (I assume) were Ginny's goals. I would also point out that Ginny's dislike of Fleur, and her certainty that her mother would break her and Bill up, also didn't play out. It turns out Fleur *is* a good match for Bill. I just think that, like Harry's anger in OotP, Ginny's anger is a negative rather than a positive, and something she needs to improve upon. (Though, as Pippin pointed out IIRC, there is a certain synchronicity in the way neither Harry nor Ginny are intimidated by the other's anger.) Betsy Hp From dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk Thu May 11 01:13:45 2006 From: dumbledad at yahoo.co.uk (Tim Regan) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 18:13:45 -0700 Subject: WWII analogies for Dumbledore, Harry, and Snape Message-ID: <000901c67498$27b433d0$1f97780a@europe.corp.microsoft.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152095 Hi All, In conversation about Snape today a friend and I came up with a World War II analogy I thought I'd share. First off Dumbledore is Britain - in the war at the beginning tenacious, lucky, and powerful enough to keep evil at bay, but whose glory days were further back in time. Secondly Harry is America (can you tell I'm a bit of an americanophile?). When Dumbledore faces terror alongside Harry he states: >>> "I am not worried, Harry," said Dumbledore, his voice a little stronger despite the freezing water. "I am with you." <<< just as when the United States was drawn into the war Churchill admitted that he "slept the sleep of the saved and the thankful." And thirdly Snape is Russia. Once on the dark side he forsakes his alliance and throws his energy into defeating it. The analogy does break down a bit here though. These two quotes don't quite stack up. 1) "I trust Severus Snape completely" (Dumbledore) and 2) "if Hitler invaded hell I would at least make a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." (Churchill on helping the Soviets) Just a ramble... Dumbledad. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 11 01:31:45 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 21:31:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060511013145.10962.qmail@web37206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152096 Betsy HP wrote: would also point out that Ginny's dislike of Fleur, and her certainty that her mother would break her and Bill up, also didn't play out. It turns out Fleur *is* a good match for Bill. Catherine now: Actually, Ginny disliked Fleur because she treated her like a baby, talking down to her. (Also the whole Veela thing that, I thing tend to make other women a little edgy). But Ginny is actually the one who tells Molly that the match *isn't* off. Ginny corrects Molly when she said that Bill was down-to-earth. (Sorry, can't find HBP at the moment so this is from memory) Ginny says that Bill as a curse breaker likes risks and glamour, Fleur certainly fits the glamour part! I also think that Ginny has a certain fondness for Bill more than her other brothers. He must be almost a 2nd father to her and she's more vested in his relationship with Fleur than Ron's with Lavander, for instance. I also want to note, how especially Molly's reaction to Fleur changed when Fleur had another moment of depth. (Because a lot of what we see of her is shallow....she insults the Weasley's home as boring, makes fun of Celestina, and treats pretty much everyone as lower than her...) But once Molly sees that Fleur is *really* in it for the long haul, that she truly loves Bill for who he is, and not just his looks, she changes immediately. And I do know quite a few mother's over-protective of their son's when it comes to choosing wives. This is Molly's first experience in the matter, and Fleur is *quite* the daughter-in-law! Catherine __________________________________________________ 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 celizwh at intergate.com Thu May 11 01:58:14 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 01:58:14 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora (Re: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152098 zgirnius: > > Yes, but he is very careful about using last names. > > And with female students, even a title. 'Miss Granger', > > 'Miss Brown'. The only student I can recall him addressing > > by first name is Draco. Because he's in Snape's House? > > Because of his relatioinshyip with Draco's family? Who > > knows, but it does suggests there is something more with > > him and Tonks than just a teacher/student relationship. Ceridwen: > I thought he was being snide to her, since she doesn't > like her given name. This is a way to get at Tonks. > But it shows that he does know her outside of class, > since he can make that sort of dig. houyhnhnm: I saw it as a way of putting her in her place, establishing himself in a one-up position. Imagine a possible scenario from Snape's point of view: Harry doesn't show up at the feast. Snape would have noticed right away because, for whatever reason, Harry's safety has been a primary concern of his throughout the books. Next a "weak" patronus shows up, unrecognizable as belonging to any member of the Order, with a message along the lines of "I've got Harry outside the gates." Snape heads for the gates in a state that is probably as near to panic as he ever gets. When he gets there he discovers, not an abduction of the Chosen One, but an intact Harry and a lovelorn Tonks. He's furious. A weak person, wearing her heart on her sleeve. She's an auror, for Pete's sake; she has no business being lovesick. He lets her have it. But. A few weeks ago someone brought up the suspicious "ah". ("There's no need to wait, Nymphadora, Potter is quite--ah--safe in my hands") along with the similarity to the way Snape spoke about Harry to Fake!Moody ("I merely thought," said Snape, in a voice of forced calm, "that if Potter was wondering around after hours again...it's an unfortunate habit of his...he should be stopped. For--his own safety.") Now, the hesitation is supposed to suggest that Snape doesn't really have Harry's best interest at heart. But we know differently. Whatever his motive and however much he despises Harry personally, he has always been one-pointed about Harry's physical safety. So, it suggests to me that he suspected Fake!Moody of being someone other than he appeared, most likely a DE, and he was anxious to disguise his loyalty to Dumbledore. Hence the ironic tone. ("Crouch!" Snape said, stopping dead in the doorway. "Barty Crouch!" You can almost hear him adding under his breath, "I knew you weren't Moody.") So to Tonks, at the gate, with Harry, on the night of the start-of-term feast. If Snape suspected her of being a polyjuiced DE, he would again be concerned with concealing his genuine worry about Harry's safety. And he would attempt to test her in some way. Perhaps calling her by a name he knows the real Tonks detests, in order to see how she reacts. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 02:04:37 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 02:04:37 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152099 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? What > does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or contrasted with > Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Do you agree with Harry that > Hermione got what she deserved when Cormac ambushed her under the > mistletoe? Why or why not? Alla: That Harry IS capable of being a good friend. Harry just hoped for Luna to have a great time and went for it. He does not plan for it, he just offers IMO " from the heart" and here we see another moment IMO similar to much discussed "second task" in another thread. Harry does not expect to get anything for his kind gesture and he should not expect to GET anything, but he gets something - Ginny likes that he is taking Luna ( IMO she is also sincere here), so Harry gets sort of the reward, again not that it should be expected. And whether Hermione deserved it? YES, IMO, every single moment of that. Carol: > > 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but > > Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's > > plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, > > potioning him? > > SSSusan: > I'm with Harry on this one! In fact, I'm rather shocked that > Hermione makes this claim. Just think about Merope and Tom; the > consequences can be pretty ghastly. Alla: You know what I am thinking? I am wondering whether Hermione would be singing a different tune about Love potions if somebody used it on her? They are horrible, IMO. Love potions, I mean. > SSSusan: > I mean, I'm convinced he's DDM!, and I find him a fascinating person, > but I definitely don't like the guy. I *might* by the end of Book 7, > but that's TBD. So when I read about him being given a bit of a hard > time, I tend to think things like, "See how it feels??" Alla: If we multiply yours "see how it feels??", we will get my reaction. :) But now I am curious, if you don't mind answering. We know that we see who Snape IS ( his character, NOT his loyalties) quite similar and since you do think already that Snape IS DD!M and still don't like his general character, what may cause you to like Snape as "person" in book 7? I am just at genuine loss what Snape may do even if he is faithful Dumbledore man,who killed Dumbledore on his orders in order to change his "character' in book 7. That question of course does not apply if one sees Snape's character as heroic, romantic, noble, whatever. I know you don't see it that way. You see Snape as having SOME nobility which means following DD orders, right? So, yeah, my inquiring mind wants to know :) SSSusan: So, again, I find it rather amusing when Snape's > own skills & accomplishments are... "underacknowledged," shall we say? Alla: My word for that is "satisfying", extremely satisfying, but unfortunately that scene is not nearly enough for me to be fully satisfying :) Carol: > > 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's > loyalties lie? Why do you think the chapter is titled "The Unbreakable Vow" > when > > the vow is barely mentioned? > > zgirnius: > Spinner's End tipped me off the fence and into the DDM! camp. This > chapter confirmed my view. Particularly Snape's little "Freudian > slip" in his talk with Draco: > "What thoughts are you trying to conceal from your master, Draco?" > (YOUR master? not OUR?) > Alla: Oh, this is a good catch Zara, good catch indeed. But if I may say it will work just as well if Snape does not consider neither Dumbledore no Voldemort his master, no? In essense that is perfectly fine if Snape is his own master, IMO. Alla. Thank you for the great questions Carol. Too bad I debated with myself for too long whether to answer or not and now everything else which I wanted to say initially is said. Oh well, different threads often emerge from chapters discussions, I am sure there will be a place for my two cents. :) From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 02:27:01 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 02:27:01 -0000 Subject: Why Snape must ultimately be a hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152100 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Don L." wrote: > IMO, if I am correct, he has already acted > heroically and redeemed himself. This may not appease all, but I > believe Harry once he understands the reason for Snape's actions and > Dumbledore's death will believe Snape entirely redeemed regardless of > past abuse. Love Snape, admire Snape as person, perhaps never. > Understand him as a hero, IMHO Harry and wisarding community will > indeed. > Well, you are certainly right that would not appease all. It would be, IMO, a reprehensible failure on JKR's part, amounting to speaking approvingly of the abuse of children. Unless there is a very specific attention to this issue, including a profound apology on Snape's part for his abuse of Harry and Neville, then I think the books will be, as I've stated before, worth nothing but mulch. Indeed, unless there is an exploration of Dumbledore's failure to rebuke and restrain Snape's abuse of Harry and Neville, I will say that JKR has failed reprehensibly and spoken approvingly of the abuse of children. She, after all, is the one who called Dumbledore an "epitome of goodness." But, we will see. Lupinlore From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 03:30:57 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 03:30:57 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: <20060510122954.48312.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152101 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Joe Goodwin wrote: > Snape is, in my regional phrase, as ugly as a busted blister. > Greasy hair, yellow teeth, sallow skin. Yeah Harry doesn't like > Snape but that doesn't mean he doesn't get an accurate view of > him. Harry also doesn't like Draco but few think Draco is ugly > based on Harry's POV. Well, we could argue about this but I think that Grandpre's illustrations are really the best indication of what Snape looks like. She's illustrated all the books, and no doubt Rowling would not continue to use her if she didn't approve. Here's one from PoA: http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/10/30/hpdrawing27.jpg To me here he looks threatening, and commanding, and certainly he has sharp features, but even though he is lit from underneath (typical unflattering horror lighting), he most definitely does not look "ugly." No "uglier" than Lupin does in an illustration from the same book: http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/10/30/hpdrawing29.jpg In the illustration of him in HBP, *I* think Snape looks positively handsome with his goatee (which becomes him). In general, I certainly don't think Rowling intends him to be strikingly good looking, but neither do I think that dispassionate observers are supposed to perceive him as hideous. His attitude, in general, tends to inform how we see him. Lupin, for example, is ever described as being attractive. He looks "ill and exhausted" when we first see him, wearing shabby clothes, and seeming older than he really is. With Lupin as well, his attitude and his personality affect how we see him. Leslie From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 03:31:28 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 03:31:28 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: <20060510122954.48312.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152102 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Joe Goodwin wrote: > Snape is, in my regional phrase, as ugly as a busted blister. > Greasy hair, yellow teeth, sallow skin. Yeah Harry doesn't like > Snape but that doesn't mean he doesn't get an accurate view of > him. Harry also doesn't like Draco but few think Draco is ugly > based on Harry's POV. Well, we could argue about this but I think that Grandpre's illustrations are really the best indication of what Snape looks like. She's illustrated all the books, and no doubt Rowling would not continue to use her if she didn't approve. Here's one from PoA: http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/10/30/hpdrawing27.jpg To me here he looks threatening, and commanding, and certainly he has sharp features, but even though he is lit from underneath (typical unflattering horror lighting), he most definitely does not look "ugly." No "uglier" than Lupin does in an illustration from the same book: http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/10/30/hpdrawing29.jpg In the illustration of him in HBP, *I* think Snape looks positively handsome with his goatee (which becomes him). In general, I certainly don't think Rowling intends him to be strikingly good looking, but neither do I think that dispassionate observers are supposed to perceive him as hideous. His attitude, in general, tends to inform how we see him. Lupin, for example, is ever described as being attractive. He looks "ill and exhausted" when we first see him, wearing shabby clothes, and seeming older than he really is. With Lupin as well, his attitude and his personality affect how we see him. Leslie From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 03:40:16 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 03:40:16 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152103 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > >>gelite67: [I think] > > > JKR could have given Ginny any temperament that she wanted to, > > > but she made her spunky and yes, sometimes, angry. I prefer to > > > think there is a reason for this other than merely matching > > > Harry with someone who has a strong personality: Could it be > > > that this scene foreshadows that Ginny may be able to perform an > > > Unforgiveable Curse and "mean it" (something Harry has yet to > > > pull off)? > > > >>Allie: > > Ooh, I like the idea of Ginny's angry/mean streak being useful in > > a defense situation. > > > > Betsy Hp wrote: > I really don't like the idea of Ginny's anger (which leads to her > being fairly mean) as a positive. It doesn't make her strong. In > fact, her rage seems to control her rather than the other way > around. She was near tears in her argument with Ron (which signals > a lack of control, IMO). And her meanness to Ron led to a rather > big crises for her quidditch team and a major rift between Ron and > Hermione. Neither of which (I assume) were Ginny's goals. > > > I just think that, like Harry's anger in OotP, Ginny's anger is a > negative rather than a positive, and something she needs to improve > upon. (Though, as Pippin pointed out IIRC, there is a certain > synchronicity in the way neither Harry nor Ginny are intimidated by > the other's anger.) \ > Angie here: Well, I think righteous anger has its place and it was that kind of situation I was alluding to that might occur in Book 7, not the petty stuff that we see with Ginny in HBP. Which was in fact my point -- how impressive will Ginny be when she truly "needs" to cast a spell for a good reason, like to save someone else's life? I can't imagine JKR simply dropped in all these reference to how powerful Ginny is and how angry she can get for no good reason. I also don't agree that tears necessarily signal a lack of control -- Ginny's tears may have been the very thing that actually prevented her from acting because they served as a release. Ron, who wasn't near tears, was the one who actually fired off his wand, not Ginny. From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Thu May 11 04:33:28 2006 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 00:33:28 EDT Subject: The TWT - a peculiar event Message-ID: <30d.46a590c.31941898@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152104 > "bigdaddy999197": > That whoever made it to the end of the maze won the tournment > says the point totals, as well as the previous tasks, counted for > nothing. Sandy: Well, no, that's not true. The point totals determined in which order they went into the maze. It stands to reason that the sooner you go into the maze the better your chances are of getting to the cup first. Therefore, the points did count for something, as did the first two events that the points were awarded for. From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu May 11 09:09:32 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 05:09:32 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero Message-ID: <437.91c13c.3194594c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152105 In a message dated 5/10/2006 11:31:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, leslie41 at yahoo.com writes: Well, we could argue about this but I think that Grandpre's illustrations are really the best indication of what Snape looks like. She's illustrated all the books, and no doubt Rowling would not continue to use her if she didn't approve. -------------------- Sherrie here: Rowling didn't choose her - Scholastic did, and her illustrations differ radically from the descriptions in the books. Receding hairline and a goatee? Where are THEY mentioned in the books? I wish Scholastic would change illustrators - or better yet, follow the UK versions and get rid of the illustrations altogether. It would shorten the US editions by at least 10 pages! IMHO, a better idea of Snape's appearance (ignoring the greenish skin!) would come from the earlier British illustrations - the ones that Hallmark used for their ornaments, that appear on the legal tender coins that were issued a few years back - and I have a beach towel with the "Potions Class" illustration. (Snape is standing over Harry's cauldron, with Ron & Hermione in the background.) Whoever drew those actually read the book. Just my 2 Knuts - as ever, YMMV. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 13:35:24 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 13:35:24 -0000 Subject: Snape's Looks? Was Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: <437.91c13c.3194594c@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152106 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at ... wrote: Leslie41: > Well, we could argue about this but I think that Grandpre's > illustrations are really the best indication of what Snape looks > like. She's illustrated all the books, and no doubt Rowling would > not continue to use her if she didn't approve. > > -------------------- Sherrie: > > Rowling didn't choose her - Scholastic did, and her illustrations > differ radically from the descriptions in the books. Receding > hairline and a goatee? Where are THEY mentioned in the books? > Wow. Didn't know that. Where did you get your info? I still find it hard to believe that Rowling would allow Scholastic to continue to use Grandpre if she didn't ultimately approve of her illustrations. She's richer than the queen, and in many ways far more powerful. I did find a pic of what proportedly is Rowling's own illustration of Snape: http://www.fictionalley.org/harryandme/profsnape.jpg Hrm. Not sure if he's "ugly" or just unpleasant looking because of his expression. Certainly he has the big conk, though. You know what they say about men with big noses.... :^) Leslie41 From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Thu May 11 13:35:52 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 13:35:52 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora (Re: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152107 > houyhnhnm: > I saw it as a way of putting her in her place, establishing himself in a one-up position. Steven1965aaa: I just see this as a manifestation of Snape's nasty personality. He has a knack for finding someone's weakness and then just repeatedly drilling in on it. For example, constantly reminding Sirius how he can't leave the house and help, calling Ron the boy who can't apparate, saying "I see no difference" regarding Hermione's "teeth extensions", his digs to Harry re: his dead father, goes without saying re: Neville. This is just another example --- he knows Tonks doesn't like her first name, so he makes sure to use it; he sees what he perceives to be a weakness in the form of the new patronus and does not fail to mention it. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 14:30:13 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 14:30:13 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152108 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" > Steven1965aaa: > > I just see this as a manifestation of Snape's nasty personality. He > has a knack for finding someone's weakness and then just repeatedly > drilling in on it. For example, constantly reminding Sirius how he > can't leave the house and help, calling Ron the boy who can't > apparate, saying "I see no difference" regarding Hermione's "teeth > extensions", his digs to Harry re: his dead father, goes without > saying re: Neville. This is just another example --- he knows Tonks > doesn't like her first name, so he makes sure to use it; he sees what > he perceives to be a weakness in the form of the new patronus and > does not fail to mention it. Yup, that seems to me to be Snape all over. HOWEVER, I think that in many if not most cases what's revealed as a result is not only Snape's "nasty personality" (for which we have abundant evidence otherwise) but a weakness in the object of his scorn. Sirius Black is a hothead. We all know that. Snape is the one who makes that most obvious to us. I would venture to say that had Black been rational enough to stand up to the minor taunts of an old school nemesis, he would not have gone and gotten himself killed. Nymphadora Tonks is lovelorn. This is not necessarily a character weakness per se, but it is rather inconvenient and not quite disciplined of her to act the way she does during what is ostensibly a very dangerous period for the order. You'll notice Harry willfully pushes Ginny away when he realizes that he has serious work to do regarding Voldemort. Tonks becomes visibly weak and clingy, and dumps her problems on yet another member of the order (Molly). If her patronus is weak, SHE is weak. That's not good. There's always that person in our lives who attempts to get us to crack, and most often it's a show of character NOT to crack, to be able to coolly stand up to that person. Once that day arrives, and we can, often times we find ourselves the recipient of that person's respect. Thus, the Severus Snapes in our lives actually make us better and stronger people. The people in the books with the greatest strength of character don't let Snape get to them. Remus Lupin, for example. Harry at this point is much like his godfather. Undisciplined. Frazzled. A hothead. The ONLY way for him to get the better of Snape is to discipline himself, to close his mind. To NOT feel hatred. Which is, of course, what Snape has been trying to teach him to do for years. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 15:18:11 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 15:18:11 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152109 Leslie41: Yup, that seems to me to be Snape all over. HOWEVER, I think that in many if not most cases what's revealed as a result is not only Snape's "nasty personality" (for which we have abundant evidence otherwise) but a weakness in the object of his scorn. Nymphadora Tonks is lovelorn. This is not necessarily a character weakness per se, but it is rather inconvenient and not quite disciplined of her to act the way she does during what is ostensibly a very dangerous period for the order. You'll notice Harry willfully pushes Ginny away when he realizes that he has serious work to do regarding Voldemort. Tonks becomes visibly weak and clingy, and dumps her problems on yet another member of the order (Molly). If her patronus is weak, SHE is weak. That's not good. Alla: Um, I'd say what Snape perceives as a weakness in the person is not necessarily the weakness in the person. Somehow I am not seeing JKR sending the message that love, real love at the time of war makes the person weak. That is of course even putting aside the question who gave Snape a right to mock Tonks in the first place. Tonks was not weak because of love per se, IMO, she was weak because Remus was not returning her love, or so she thought. Molly and Arthur's love makes them stronger, NOT weaker. Fleur declares her decision to stand by wounded Bill and I don't see that this is written as something bad, quite the contrary. Harry pushed away Ginny, true, but I bet he will learn that this was a very wrong decision in book 7 and Ginny presence would give him more strength, not less. At the end Mcgonagall says that Dumbledore would have wanted more love around, despite the war ( paraphrase) and Fleur and Bills' wedding is not postponed. Leslie41: Thus, the Severus Snapes in our lives actually make us better and stronger people. Alla: LOL! Leslie41: The people in the books with the greatest strength of character don't let Snape get to them. Remus Lupin, for example. Alla: And Snape shows him so much respect for that. :) JMO, Alla From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Thu May 11 15:29:53 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 15:29:53 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152110 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: The ONLY way for him to get the better of Snape is to discipline himself, to close his mind. To NOT feel hatred. Which is, of course, what Snape has been trying to teach him to do for years. Steven1965aaa: Perhaps. But regardless of any possible ulterior motive, the guys just enjoys getting under others' skin. From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu May 11 15:33:55 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 08:33:55 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152111 Leslie41 Yup, that seems to me to be Snape all over. HOWEVER, I think that in many if not most cases what's revealed as a result is not only Snape's "nasty personality" (for which we have abundant evidence otherwise) but a weakness in the object of his scorn. Sherry now: A weakness in Snape's opinion, but not necessarily in everyone else's. Leslie41 Sirius Black is a hothead. We all know that. Snape is the one who makes that most obvious to us. I would venture to say that had Black been rational enough to stand up to the minor taunts of an old school nemesis, he would not have gone and gotten himself killed. Sherry now: So, Sirius should have sat on his rear and let Harry be in danger and done nothing? Even though I do not like and do not believe in the goodness of Snape under any circumstances, I don't believe his taunting had much to do with Sirius rushing to save Harry. Sirius *had* to do it. It's who he is. It's not a bad thing that he wants to protect his pack. It's not his fault that he died. Who would have applauded his sensibility if he had stayed home? Probably, we would have all called him a coward and thought he was a pretty unfeeling person. His role as Harry's only parental figure demands that he goes, no matter what Dumbledore said. And the person who deserves the blame for the death of Sirius is Bella, not Sirius. Sirius is the victim after all. Leslie41 Nymphadora Tonks is lovelorn. This is not necessarily a character weakness per se, but it is rather inconvenient and not quite disciplined of her to act the way she does during what is ostensibly a very dangerous period for the order. You'll notice Harry willfully pushes Ginny away when he realizes that he has serious work to do regarding Voldemort. Tonks becomes visibly weak and clingy, and dumps her problems on yet another member of the order (Molly). If her patronus is weak, SHE is weak. That's not good. Sherry now; But we are led to believe that love is the most important thing, the power the "dark Lord knows not". I can't see her love as a weakness. I understand that Snape considers love as a weakness. Also, friends don't "dump" their problems on friends. Friends confide in friends. I'm positive that is what Tonks was doing with Molly. It's what friends do. It's the strength of friendship. Leslie41 Harry at this point is much like his godfather. Undisciplined. Frazzled. A hothead. The ONLY way for him to get the better of Snape is to discipline himself, to close his mind. To NOT feel hatred. Which is, of course, what Snape has been trying to teach him to do for years. Sherry now: I have the definite impression that a calm stoic Harry is not a person who is going to beat Voldemort. Harry's emotions are his strength. Sure, as he matures, he will learn to control them, or to use them more wisely to some extent, but in a general sense, Harry's emotions are who he is. We don't want him to turn into another Snape after all. and besides, the ever popular and wise Dumbledore said that Voldemort won't be using that old trick on him anymore. So, the only one Harry has to learn to close his mind to is Snape. sherry From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Thu May 11 15:48:59 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 15:48:59 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152112 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: Well, we could argue about this but I think that Grandpre's illustrations are really the best indication of what Snape looks like. Steven1965aaa: I think the best indication of what he looks like are the actual words describing his appearance, in the books. Based on the words in the books, each reader constructs a mental image of him. Each reader constructs his or her own distinct mental image, based on the same words, using imagination, past experience, etc. That's part of the beauty of a book, as opposed to visual media. Although I have to admit that I see him as Alan Rickman! From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu May 11 16:48:41 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 16:48:41 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152113 > > Sherry now; > But we are led to believe that love is the most important thing, the power > the "dark Lord knows not". I can't see her love as a weakness. I > understand that Snape considers love as a weakness. Also, friends don't > "dump" their problems on friends. Friends confide in friends. I'm positive > that is what Tonks was doing with Molly. It's what friends do. It's the > strength of friendship. Pippin: I think JKR considers Ginny's method of dealing with unrequited love far better than Tonks's. It was when Ginny was pining for Harry and feeling depressed and unworthy that she became vulnerable to Riddle. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu May 11 17:12:54 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 17:12:54 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152114 > > SSSusan: > > > I mean, I'm convinced he's DDM!, and I find him a fascinating > person, but I definitely don't like the guy. I *might* by the end of Book > 7, but that's TBD. So when I read about him being given a bit of a > hard time, I tend to think things like, "See how it feels??" > > Alla: > > If we multiply yours "see how it feels??", we will get my > reaction. :) Pippin: If we go by the Pensieve scene, Snape does know how it feels. I think, in a way, it's Harry who doesn't know how it feels. His reaction to humiliation is anger and helplessness, but he's never, ever felt like a worthless loser. He's only come close when he's blaming himself for failing to rescue Sirius, but he numbs that feeling with anger. Snape has been doing the same thing, IMO, but for much longer. I think, to draw this together with the hero-types thread, that this is a vicious cycle, like Rick's drinking in Casablanca. Rick drinks to numb his feelings of worthlessness, but it makes him feel more worthless to know he's a drunkard. Snape numbs his feelings of worthlessness with anger and punishments, (which he thinks are righteous and deserved) but it makes him feel more worthless when they seem to have no effect except to make Harry and Neville more resistant to his teaching. I think this feeling of worthlessness goes back to the attempt on Snape's life which was treated as a joke, and that should this be resolved in Book Seven, the reader will finally understand Snape, while Snape will be able to break the cycle of anger. Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu May 11 17:39:06 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 17:39:06 -0000 Subject: Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152115 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > Well, we could argue about this but I think that Grandpre's > illustrations are really the best indication of what Snape looks > like. > > Steven1965aaa: > > I think the best indication of what he looks like are the actual > words describing his appearance, in the books. Based on the words > in the books, each reader constructs a mental image of him. Each > reader constructs his or her own distinct mental image, based on > the same words, using imagination, past experience, etc. That's > part of the beauty of a book, as opposed to visual media. > > Although I have to admit that I see him as Alan Rickman! > bboyminn: I'm inclined to agree with Steven1965aaa here. Grandpre's illustration are caricatures of the various characters. They capture the essense of the character without forcing an image. I think JKR specifically said that she didn't want illustrations in here books because she wanted individuals to form their own image of the characters. This is one of the great aspect of JKR's books, she uses words and creates desciptions in a very compact way. She gives us just enough to stimulate our imaginations to fill in the detail, and that creates are far more vivid mental picture than describing every speck of lint on the carpet, etc.... In that sense, JKR did not create Ron or Hogwarts, we did. If you combine all the descriptions of Ron in the books, you will indeed find a very sparse total description. The very first description of Ron at the train station when he and Harry first meet is extremely short. Yet, I suspect in that moment each and every one of us created a perfect mental picture of Ron that has grown along with Ron as he's aged. I think one of the reason JKR doesn't object to and even enjoys Grandpre's chapter illustrations is because they are such caricatures that they don't force an image of the character on use, but at the same time do catch the essense of that character very clearly. Though I enjoy the chapter illustations and books covers greatly, they have never once influenced my mental image of any character. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From triinum at yahoo.com Thu May 11 16:40:20 2006 From: triinum at yahoo.com (triinum) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 16:40:20 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora (Re: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152116 houyhnhnm: > But. A few weeks ago someone brought up the suspicious "ah". > ("There's no need to wait, Nymphadora, Potter is quite--ah--safe > in my hands") along with the similarity to the way Snape spoke > about Harry to Fake!Moody ("I merely thought," said Snape, in a > voice of forced calm, "that if Potter was wondering around after > hours again...it's an unfortunate habit of his...he should be > stopped. For--his own safety.") T: The first time I read this "-ah-" moment, I automatically interpreted it as *irony* at the expense of her distrust in him. I concluded that Tonks must have somehow given him an impression that she didn't trust him completely. (It's fairly plausible, for we know a number of order members who don't, and who are not afraid to say so.) So now Snape is teasing her about it: "I know you don't trust me, but you still have to leave Potter alone with me; I *say* that he's --ah-- safe, but you won't know for sure, will you? And yet you have no choice but to let me take him! And besides, your lovesickness is pathetic." In this scene, by the way, Tonks is the first aggressor. Her "I sent my message to Hagrid" is not very polite, is it? It shows clearly that there is some animosity between them already, and IMO it's aslo suggestive of her distrust in Snape (Why else would she be upset that she'll have to hand Potter to him instead of Hagrid? Because she thinks Potter doesn't like to walk with Snape? Come on, she's not *that* protective around Harry!). And Snape is just a little too nasty and cruel for it to be his default behaviour to a randomly picked individual from the street. He's usually almost passably *civil* to grownups. At least the ones that haven't shown any hostility against him. But it probably doesn't take much to turn him against you. He's paranoid. A slight unwilling expression of distrust by tonks would have done the trick. In this scene, Snape is responding to her rather offencive, unnecessary and uncalled-for "I sent my message to Hagrid" comment, and he's doing his cruellist for reprisal. Of course, Tonks was probably his student just a few years ago, and maybe he hasn't accepted her as a *grownup* yet. Maybe he didn't like her as a student. And she's in love with the werewolf who once tried to eat him up. So there are other reasons for him to dislike her. But I still thik that her distrust in him is clearly hinted to. T From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 18:00:58 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:00:58 -0000 Subject: Ginny's Anger (was:Re: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152117 > >>Betsy Hp wrote: > > I really don't like the idea of Ginny's anger (which leads to > > her being fairly mean) as a positive. It doesn't make her > > strong. In fact, her rage seems to control her rather than the > > other way around. > > > >>Angie: > Well, I think righteous anger has its place and it was that kind > of situation I was alluding to that might occur in Book 7, not the > petty stuff that we see with Ginny in HBP. > Betsy Hp: But we've yet to see (especially in teenage Ginny) an expression of righteous anger. It's all been petty and vindictive and done more harm than good. I agree that righteous anger can be a powerful thing. I just haven't see Ginny express it. Not that she *can't* express it. Just that I wouldn't say her actions in HBP foreshadowed any such thing. If JKR had wanted to foreshadow the strength behind Ginny's anger she'd have given her a scene where she actually expressed righteous anger, I think. Like sticking up for Luna, for example. Or Ron, for that matter. > >>Angie: > I can't imagine JKR simply dropped in all these reference to how > powerful Ginny is and how angry she can get for no good reason. Betsy Hp: I guess I haven't seen any evidence of Ginny being powerful. She's not *weak*, by any stretch, but she hasn't stood out, to me, as a singularly powerful witch. And her angry scenes, IMO, made her look weaker, if anything. Honestly, I think JKR set Ginny's anger up as something Ginny needs to improve upon, not use. > >>Angie: > I also don't agree that tears necessarily signal a lack of > control -- Ginny's tears may have been the very thing that > actually prevented her from acting because they served as a > release. Ron, who wasn't near tears, was the one who actually > fired off his wand, not Ginny. Betsy Hp: To me it illustrated the classic difference between boys and girls. Girls cry when they are overcome by anger. Boys fight. Neither Ron nor Ginny were in control in that scene. That's why it was good that Harry was there. > >>Betsy HP: > > I would also point out that Ginny's dislike of Fleur, and her > > certainty that her mother would break her and Bill up, also > > didn't play out. It turns out Fleur *is* a good match for Bill. > >>Catherine: > Actually, Ginny disliked Fleur because she treated her like a > baby, talking down to her. > Betsy Hp: I think this is a bit chicken and the egg. Did Fleur talk down to Ginny because Ginny expressed her dislike for Fleur or vice verse? (I lean towards the former, but I have the scene of the anouncement in my head, with an excited and happy Bill and Fleur, and a horrified and angry Molly and Ginny. No canon to support it, so I could well be wrong. I think either interpertation could work.) Either way, my point was more that Ginny's anger with Fleur turns out to be misguided. Her actions don't do anything to help the situation, and in fact, Ginny's anger only goes towards adding more tension to an already tense time. That this is another situation where Ginny's anger is a negative, not a positive. She isn't righteously protecting her brother from a shallow harpy. > >>Catherine: > I also think that Ginny has a certain fondness for Bill more than > her other brothers. > Betsy Hp: Oh, absolutely. I completely agree that there's a lot going on there and Ginny's dislike of Fleur doesn't make her a bad person. (I have a feeling Ginny would find any girl Bill brought home unworthy of her brother.) My only point was that this was not a situation where Ginny's anger turned out to be a good thing. Betsy Hp From laurabosak at yahoo.com Thu May 11 17:52:38 2006 From: laurabosak at yahoo.com (laurabosak) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 17:52:38 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152118 Carol wrote: > > > At dinner, while Ron is snogging Lavender, Harry and Parvati talk > about her parents' decision to let her stay at Hogwarts despite the > attack on Katie Bell. Hermione informs them that she's meeting Cormac > McLaggen, and Ron pulls back from kissing Lavender. Parvati notes > that Hermione likes Quidditch players, and Hermione responds that she > likes *really good* Quidditch players. As she leaves, Parvati and > Lavender begin gossiping about her and Cormac. Ron stares blankly, > and Harry ponders "the depths to which girls [will] sink to get > revenge." > Laura: Does anyone think we might see Harry pondering "the depths to which girls (will) sink to get revenge" in Book 7 when we learn more about the interaction between Lily and Snape? From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 18:14:58 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 11:14:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape's Looks? Was Hero types was Re: Another Snape thread/ Snape as hero In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060511181458.39062.qmail@web61312.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152119 Leslie: I did find a pic of what proportedly is Rowling's own illustration of Snape: http://www.fictionalley.org/harryandme/profsnape.jpg Hrm. Not sure if he's "ugly" or just unpleasant looking because of his expression. Joe: Errr add sallow skin, greasy hair and yellow teeth to that and he is just about as ugly as I imagined. Still might be a hero. Still might not be a hero. But yeah he is ugly for sure. I imagine Lupin as having a messed up grill from his furry little problem. Snape's ugly could just be his personality shining through though. Joe From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 18:32:28 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:32:28 -0000 Subject: Social Structure in the WW (was:Re: Hero types / Why Snape must...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152120 > >>Pippin: > Will it? It sounds like you're describing the 19th century system > of promotion satirized by Mark Twain and Gilbert & Sullivan, where > blood was all and merit was nothing. Betsy Hp: I am, sort of. Though, I think those who hold to such things in the WW would say blood *is* merit. I'm not saying this is a *good* system. I mean, look how well run the Ministry actually is. But it's the sort of system that makes sense to the very, very closed off WW. > >>Pippin: > But it sounds like this system has collapsed because otherwise > Draco would have just rolled his eyes at Lucius's comment and > said, "Yes, frightfully keen, I'm afraid." She wouldn't be a > threat. Merit does count for something apparently. > Betsy Hp: Ah, but Draco should have the top grades *because* he is a Malfoy, because of his blood. By failing (and to a muggleborn at that) Draco is failing his blood. But *that's* what the system decrees. Not that merit doesn't count. But that those of purer blood will by their nature pull the higher grades. (In a way, the much honored Weasley brothers would be proof of this to any who believed in such things.) But that is also what makes Hermione so unique. In spite of her blood, she does so well. Why, it's like a singing monkey, or a dog walking on hind legs! But she's the exception that proves the rule (to those who believe such things), and her insanity with the house- elves would only go to show that you can take the girl away from the Muggles, but you can't take the Muggle out of the girl. > >>Pippin: > It's possible that Percy abandoned his interest in muggleborn > Penelope, and I've wondered myself whether Molly will really be > pleased to put Muriel's tiara on Hermione's head, but Penelope's > name suggests that Percy will come back to her eventually. Betsy Hp: I can see Percy and Penelope getting married. And I can see Molly being not quite that thrilled that two of her sons are marrying muggleborns. She'll keep a sharp eye on the grandchildren, make sure they're raised right without too much "outsider" influence. But Molly is married to Arthur. And while she might not fully support his issues, she does seem to realize that she can only fight them so much. Both Penelope and Hermione will be taking the Weasley name, too. I wonder how Molly (or even Arthur) would have reacted should *Ginny* have chosen to marry a Muggleborn. There may have been a bit more protest. > >>Pippin: > Muggleborn males don't seem to have trouble finding mates, as far > as I can see. Ted Tonks landed himself a pureblood and so did > Tobias Snape. Betsy Hp: Andromeda was disowned by her family (per the tapestry, anyway). And Mr. Tonks himself hasn't been named as holding a job of power or position within the WW. Tobias was a full out Muggle though. And something obviously went a bit wrong with that marriage. Especially with his son joining an extreme political group that was so very hostile to Tobias and his ilk. Betsy Hp From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 18:54:57 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:54:57 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152121 Responding to a couple of people here.... > Alla: > Um, I'd say what Snape perceives as a weakness in the person is not > necessarily the weakness in the person. Somehow I am not seeing JKR > sending the message that love, real love at the time of war makes > the person weak. Leslie41: I don't know if that's what she's intending, but that's what I'm seeing. Being lovelorn makes a person weaker. > Alla: > That is of course even putting aside the question who gave Snape a > right to mock Tonks in the first place. Leslie41: Well, no one (least of all myself) would call him a nice guy. > Alla: > Tonks was not weak because of love per se, IMO, she was weak > because Remus was not returning her love, or so she thought. Leslie41: No, she was weak because of how she RESPONDED to that thought. She pretty much turned into a pile of goo. For example, look at Ginny. By HBP it's not that she stopped loving Harry. But instead of pining endlessly, she went on with her life, became her own person, did her own thing...and as a result becomes far stronger than if she had continued her silent yearning for him. Had she continued pining, my guess is he would not have fallen for her at all. It's not love that makes a person weak. It's useless pining. > Sherry: > So, Sirius should have sat on his rear and let Harry be in danger > and done nothing? Even though I do not like and do not believe in > the goodness of Snape under any circumstances, I don't believe his > taunting had much to do with Sirius rushing to save Harry. Leslie41: No, you're right. It doesn't. but it establishes him, again, as a hothead, as someone Snape can get to with his taunts. And if Snape can do that, well, so can others. Like Kreacher for example. > Sherry: > Sirius *had* to do it. It's who he is. It's not a bad thing that > he wants to protect his pack. It's not his fault that he died. > Who would have applauded his sensibility if he had stayed > home? Probably, we would have all called him a coward and thought > he was a pretty unfeeling person. His role as Harry's only > parental figure demands that he goes, no matter what Dumbledore > said. And the person who deserves the blame for the death of > Sirius is Bella, not Sirius. Sirius is the victim after all. Leslie41: Ah, but why is Sirius at the Department of Mysteries anyway? Because he has a bad temper. He was yelling at Kreacher to get out of the kitchen. He treats Kreacher very badly. Understandable, but hardly admirable. Dumbledore even comments on it. This allows Kreacher to interpret the order "out" to accomodate his leaving the house, which sets the whole disaster at the Department of Mysteries in motion. It's no mistake that Sirius Black's bad temper was the catalyst for what happened there. No, he's not "responsible" for his own death, but his own actions put himself there, where he was killed. > Sherry > But we are led to believe that love is the most important thing, > the power the "dark Lord knows not". I can't see her love as a > weakness. I understand that Snape considers love as a weakness. > Also, friends don't "dump" their problems on friends. Friends > confide in friends. I'm positive that is what Tonks was doing > with Molly. It's what friends do. It's the strength of > friendship. Leslie41: Again, I don't think love is the problem. It's the "lovesickness" that is. And yeah, friends confide in friends, but anyone who's been friends with someone who's lovesick knows that often times the person becomes self-destructive about the situation, and won't shut up, or see reason, or even LISTEN to anything said to them. Because, they're loveSICK. It's like a mental disease or something. > Sherry: > I have the definite impression that a calm stoic Harry is not a > person who is going to beat Voldemort. Harry's emotions are his > strength. Leslie41: It's a very calm and stoic Harry who insists that Sirius and Remus spare Peter's life. I would argue that Harry's best moments come when he really thinks through what's going on and listens and considers all alternatives. When he channels his inner Hermione. Had he given into emotion, he would have killed Sirius. Or Peter. If he gives into emotion and kills Snape, my guess is that would be the worst mistake he could possibly make. The worst mistake of his entire life. > Sherry: > Sure, as he matures, he will learn to control them, or to use them > more wisely to some extent, but in a general sense, Harry's > emotions are who he is. We don't want him to turn into another > Snape after all. I think that we do. At least in part. It would be a good thing indeed if Harry could absorb some of Snape's discipline. > Sherry: > and besides, the ever popular and wise Dumbledore said that > Voldemort won't be using that old trick on him anymore. So, the > only one Harry has to learn to close his mind to is Snape. Again, I think if he does that, it will be the biggest mistake he ever makes. From minluko at yahoo.com Thu May 11 19:11:27 2006 From: minluko at yahoo.com (minluko) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 19:11:27 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152122 > Pippin: > I think JKR considers Ginny's method of dealing with unrequited love > far better than Tonks's. It was when Ginny was pining for Harry and > feeling depressed and unworthy that she became vulnerable to Riddle. Just a little comment: it is difficult to compare Tonks' and Ginny's "methods of dealing", because the situations are so different. Ginny probably felt, as you put it, unworthy, but Tonks doesn't. She knows that Lupin loves her as well, but rejects her "for some stupid, noble reason" (Ginny's words, by the way). It's him who feels unworthy! There is just no way to deal with this Ginny's way. What is Tonks supposed to do, ask out Kingsley Shacklebolt to make Lupin jealous? He'll just think that she got over him, and that's definitely not what she wants. For Ginny, Harry's love was something hypothetical. She hoped, but she knew there is a chance that it would never happen, so for her it was easier to move on. For Tonks it must be so much more frustrating, because she knows that all she hopes for could happen right now, but she is unable to get through Lupin's "noble reasons". minluko From celizwh at intergate.com Thu May 11 20:15:24 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 20:15:24 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152123 Sherry now: > But we are led to believe that love is the most important > thing, the power the "dark Lord knows not". I can't see > her love as a weakness. houyhnhnm: I don't think Dumbledore (or Rowling) was talking about that kind of love. I don't mean that conjugal or erotic love cannot be a manifestation of the kind of love studied in the locked room. But not unrequited love, surely. I mean is it really love or is it just wanting something, something that the other person doesn't want to give. I think it is giving-love, not getting-love that is the power the "dark lord knows not". From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 21:15:28 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 21:15:28 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Thus, the Severus Snapes in our lives actually make us better and > stronger people. The people in the books with the greatest strength of > character don't let Snape get to them. Remus Lupin, for example. > > Harry at this point is much like his godfather. Undisciplined. > Frazzled. A hothead. The ONLY way for him to get the better of Snape > is to discipline himself, to close his mind. To NOT feel hatred. > Well, once again, IMO if that's the message JKR is sending, she will have failed in a reprehensible and monstrous way. In effect, she will have celebrated the abuse of children. Actually, though, I don't think she's trying to do any such thing. She isn't, I think, usually trying to send any particular message. That isn't to say that there aren't themes in the Potter saga that come through, or that there won't be clear messages that come out of the series as a whole. But I don't think she's particularly thinking about those messages in crafting particular scenes or even particular character interactions. By and large, JKR is driven by plot, which is one of her greatest strengths and one of her greatest weaknesses. Most of the things that happen occur as plot points, not philosophical propositions. And herein is where she gets into hot water again and again. Just look at what happened with Dumbledore at the end of OOTP, and the rapid back-peddling she had to do at the start of HBP to get out of that mess. In effect, she had to craft half-a-chapter in order to say "Okay, here's this situation and here's what I mean to get across and didn't in the last book." In terms of emotions, there are plentiful points where Harry's human emotions are spoken of as his greatest strength -- and the implications are that it is Voldemort's inability to feel ordinary human emotions in any but the most twisted and perverse forms that is his greatest weakness (what is the snake but the epitome of coldness?). I wouldn't be surprised if the same is true of Snape. If we want to read between the lines -- I don't, but if we were to do so -- then the message being sent by the failure of occlumency and its aftermath is that Snape's "discipline" is the thing that will undo him in the end, since the only thing that can defeat Voldemort is the type of emotion that Snape has deliberately cut himself off from (and much of Snape's bitterness and confusion may come from the fact that he doesn't understand why DD favors Harry's love over Snape's discipline and intellectual prowess). And therein lies, I think, Harry's real challenge. There is no danger of him becoming another Voldemort. There is an outside chance of him becoming another Snape, and that would be the sure doom of the Wizarding World. And the greatest mistake he has ever made, to boot. Lupinlore From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 23:33:03 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 23:33:03 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152125 What would constitute redemption for Severus Snape? Now there is a hot topic. Would being DDM! constitute redemption? Would being important, even instrumental, in Voldemort's fall? I would say most definitely "NO" to both. Snape's redemption is tied up with the question of personal repentance, and repentance requires a profound and genuine apology for his abuse of children, particularly Harry and Neville. Lacking that, any talk of Snape's redemption would, I think, be... premature. Now, what would be an effective apology scene? Actually, I suspect what we are likely to get is two short sentences before he expires with a gurgle. But leaving aside what we are likely to get, what would be effective? I tend to go with the HBP model of Dumbledore's confrontation with the Dursleys. One problem many of us have had with the Potter saga is the rank stupidity of the adults, manifested in multiple ways. One way is their seeming stupidity with regard to Snape's abuse of Harry and Neville. This had also been the case with the Dursleys, but the end of OOTP and the beginning of HBP laid that to rest. And yes, as Carol says, I do believe that JKR was bowing to criticism in that regard, and she very well should have bowed, as she had made horrendous mistakes. I think she has also made horrendous mistakes with regard to Snape's abuse of Harry and Neville, and the stupidity of the adults in this area. So, what would lay those issues to rest? What indeed? Lupinlore From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 12 00:45:29 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 00:45:29 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, Snape's looks, etc. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152126 RE: Snape's looks: Joe said: Snape's ugly could just be his personality shining through though. Tonks: I have noticed this about abused children. Sometimes the evil done to them seems to show itself in their appearance. And who hasn't seen a loving saintly old person that looks beautiful in spite of age and wrinkles. Snape calling Tonks Nymphadora: As to Tonks' and Snape's interaction when Harry is late getting off the train. I just listened to that chapter on CD and Snape's use of her name is nothing out of place, but his dig is at her Protronus and the fact that it looks `weak'. That is his way of saying that he thinks that she is too good for Lupin. IMO. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 12 00:54:26 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 00:54:26 -0000 Subject: Another look at the Prophesy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152127 Musing on the Prophesy. I think I might be on to something, but I don't know how it can play out, so we may be no further ahead. LV= death Lily = sacrificial love Harry = human life Death + sacrificial love = life "One can not live while the other survives" death can not exist while life is present and life can not exist when death is present. I don't really know where to go with this. But like the riddle of the Sphinx it makes the prophesy understandable, I think. Comments?? Tonks_op From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 01:31:34 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060512013134.59391.qmail@web61317.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152128 Leslie41: Ah, but why is Sirius at the Department of Mysteries anyway? Because he has a bad temper. He was yelling at Kreacher to get out of the kitchen. He treats Kreacher very badly. Understandable, but hardly admirable. Dumbledore even comments on it. This allows Kreacher to interpret the order "out" to accomodate his leaving the house, which sets the whole disaster at the Department of Mysteries in motion. It's no mistake that Sirius Black's bad temper was the catalyst for what happened there. No, he's not "responsible" for his own death, but his own actions put himself there, where he was killed. Joe: I don't see how his bad temper was the catalyst. Several Order members showed up. Given that in the past war that the Order had been badly outnumbered it would make sense to bring everyone you could to the first real fight of the war. Not to mention that Sirius has good reason not to leave saving Harry up to Dumbledore. Imagine how you would feel if you found out the the man you trusted to protect your godson and allowed to directly confront Voldemort/ Quirell in his first year at Hogwarts? Sirius has no reason to think the Order will do any better if he had remained at #12. Sirius spent years in prison for the deaths of James and Lilly suffering from the horrid effects of the dementors only to escape and find out that his worst enemy(Snape) who was directly responsible for Voldemort knowing that Harry might be his undoing is not being punished for it but instead was protected from going to Azkaban by Dumbledore. Then Snape has been allowed to treat Harry terribly while teaching at Hogwarts. You say Sirius acted as a hothead. I say Sirius had a pretty frim grasp of the way things are and acted so. At this point Sisius would have had to truly be mad to just trust that Dumbledore would take care of things. If Sirius had truly been a real hothead he would have just killed Snape. He had a pretty good reason to. Joe From celizwh at intergate.com Fri May 12 02:13:35 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 02:13:35 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora (Re: The nature of Patronuses (Patroni?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152129 T: > In this scene, by the way, Tonks is the first > aggressor. Her "I sent my message to Hagrid" is > not very polite, is it? It shows clearly that there > is some animosity between them already, and IMO it's > aslo suggestive of her distrust in Snape (Why else > would she be upset that she'll have to hand Potter > to him instead of Hagrid? [snip} > And Snape is just a little too nasty and cruel > for it to be his default behaviour to a randomly > picked individual from the street. He's usually > almost passably *civil* to grownups. At least the > ones that haven't shown any hostility against him. > But it probably doesn't take much to turn him against > you. He's paranoid. A slight unwilling expression of > distrust by tonks would have done the trick. In this > scene, Snape is responding to her rather offencive, > unnecessary and uncalled-for "I sent my message to > Hagrid" comment, and he's doing his cruellist for reprisal. houyhnhnm: That's ceratinly a reasonable interpretation. I'll have to set it aside to consider later. Right now I'm having too much fun with my own. That scene finally makes sense to me and it's been bothering me ever since I read HBP the first time. "I meant Hagrid to get the message," said Tonks frowning. That was the right answer. Tonks is frosted at being called Nymphadora. Now Snape knows it's really Tonks. He's angry at her, not for slighting him by sending her message to Hagrid, but for making him afraid for nothing. And having shown signs of "weakness" by sending a Patronus revealing her lovelorn state. I don't see any indication that Tonks was reluctant to turn Harry over to Snape. She says nothing up to the "There is no need to wait, Nymphadora ..." and there is no physical description of her. But I see it that way because I've never seen Snape as someone who enjoys inflicting pain. I see him as someone who has some very serious issues with fear (among other things), and therefore is intolerant of others' weaknesses and indifferent to their feelings. Surely that's bad enough. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri May 12 02:17:43 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 02:17:43 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, Snape's looks, etc. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152130 Tonks: > As to Tonks' and Snape's interaction when Harry is late getting off > the train. I just listened to that chapter on CD and Snape's use of > her name is nothing out of place, but his dig is at her Protronus > and the fact that it looks `weak'. That is his way of saying that > he thinks that she is too good for Lupin. IMO. Potioncat: I think you have a very good point here. I certainly agree that the use of Nymphadora wasn't a dig. I know she tells Harry to call her Tonks and I know she doesn't like her name, but DD uses it and no one thinks he was trying to insult her. But even better, I like your interpretation of the rest of the conversation. It sure would help to understand what the previous Patronus was and who it might have represented. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri May 12 02:33:48 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 02:33:48 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: <20060512013134.59391.qmail@web61317.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152131 > Joe: > Sirius spent years in prison for the deaths of James and Lilly suffering from the horrid effects of the dementors only to escape and find out that his worst enemy(Snape) who was directly responsible for Voldemort knowing that Harry might be his undoing is not being punished for it but instead was protected from going to Azkaban by Dumbledore. Then Snape has been allowed to treat Harry terribly while teaching at Hogwarts. zgirnius: Are you saying Sirius KNEW Snape was responsible? I doubt this, I think the prophecy and the circumstances around it are a secret known only to Dumbledore and Snape. Also, why do you say Snape is Sirius's worst enemy? Why would Sirius, fresh from Azkaban, see Snape in this way? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 02:43:19 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 02:43:19 -0000 Subject: Calling Tonks Nymphadora, and Snape's button pushing in general In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152132 > Sherry now: > > > But we are led to believe that love is the most important > > thing, the power the "dark Lord knows not". I can't see > > her love as a weakness. > > houyhnhnm: > > I don't think Dumbledore (or Rowling) was talking about that kind of > love. I don't mean that conjugal or erotic love cannot be a > manifestation of the kind of love studied in the locked room. But not > unrequited love, surely. I mean is it really love or is it just > wanting something, something that the other person doesn't want to > give. I think it is giving-love, not getting-love that is the power > the "dark lord knows not". > Alla: I think Dumbledore ( or Rowling) is talking about love in general. I don't think that they are talking ONLY about erotic love, but I don't think that erotic love is excluded. It is love in all varieties, which Dark Lord knows not IMO. Positive love of course , but IMO erotic love is included, just as love of the parents, love of the friends, sacrificial love, etc. So, no, I don't see Tonks love as her weakness at all. Misunderstandings which were in the way between her and Remus that stopped them from expressing their love THAT what weakened her, IMO. I would agree with you that unrequited love is excluded from this, but Tonk's love is not unrequited, IMO. That was Remus convicing himself that he does not deserve to love and to be loved, NOT Remus not having feelings for Tonks. > Pippin: > I think JKR considers Ginny's method of dealing with unrequited love far > better than Tonks's. It was when Ginny was pining for Harry and feeling > depressed and unworthy that she became vulnerable to Riddle. > Alla: Um, I don't think Tonks was dealing at all, I think she was just suffering. So, not sure about comparing methods and not sure about Ginny's method being the perfect one either. > > Joe: > > Sirius spent years in prison for the deaths of James and Lilly > suffering from the horrid effects of the dementors only to escape and > find out that his worst enemy(Snape) who was directly responsible for > Voldemort knowing that Harry might be his undoing is not being punished > for it but instead was protected from going to Azkaban by Dumbledore. > Then Snape has been allowed to treat Harry terribly while teaching at > Hogwarts. > > zgirnius: > Are you saying Sirius KNEW Snape was responsible? I doubt this, I think > the prophecy and the circumstances around it are a secret known only to > Dumbledore and Snape. > > Also, why do you say Snape is Sirius's worst enemy? Why would Sirius, > fresh from Azkaban, see Snape in this way? > Alla: I have always said that Sirius "serves him right" may hide MUCH more than school bullying and many not good things that Snape had done to them. What it hides we of course don't know. But of course what do I know. :) Also, the fact that JKR called Sirius and Snape loathing "mutual" hints at that too, IMO. As to whether Sirius knew or not - he may have been, or at least there is no direct rebuttal of that in canon, no? That is of course only IF Snape tried to talk to James about not trusting Sirius, I speculate that James would have figured out that Snape is the one who slipped the prophecy to Voldemort in the first place and then tried to do something about it, maybe. I would think James shared it with Sirius. Speculating only of course. Alla, hoping that Remus and Tonks will have many "multicolored cubs" ( love that expression) in the epilogue and Harry will get to babysit and Snape if alive will get an Azkaban cell for life and never inflicts himself on children again. From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Thu May 11 20:02:21 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 20:02:21 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152133 Look at all this hate for Ginny! In my view, Ginny only takes out her anger on people who deserve it. Ron had no business telling her off and (stopping just short of) calling her a slut. Zacharias Smith had no business questioning her inclusion on the team and calling it favoritism. Also let's not forget the haughty disdainful Fleur of GOF in deciding whether the chicken of Ginny's dislike came before the egg of Fleur's attitude. Additionally, we know for a fact that she sticks up for Luna. She's an instrument of Justice; if you mess with Ginny, you reap what you sow. As for making fun of Ron, he's her BROTHER. Do any of you have siblings? I hate to break it to everyone, but we're supposed to LIKE Ginny. We're supposed to laugh at her jokes. We're supposed to approve of her behavior. I, for one, think she's hilarious, ballsy, vivacious, and probably extremely hot. Harry deserves no less. Do y'all have bad experiences with these types of people? Nick From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 03:04:43 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 03:04:43 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152134 Carol earlier: > 10) Clearly, Crabbe and Goyle are not taking NEWT DADA with Harry and Draco. Might they be repeating fifth-year DADA (rather than taking no DADA class at all), and could they, theoretically, repeat their DADA OWLs as Snape implies? What, if anything, does this detail tell us about Snape's attitude toward DADA? Is he really concerned about Crabbe's and Goyle's DADA OWLs? What is he trying to accomplish by putting them in detention? > Carol again: Since almost no one resonded to this question, I'll explain what I had in mind. On the one hand, it seems obvious (correct me if I'm wrong!) that Snape put Crabbe and Goyle in detention to keep them away from Draco, and just possibly to try to get information out of them (a futile attempt, if he did so, because they don't know what Draco is up to). But it also suggests that, despite failing their DADA OWL, Crabbe and Goyle are taking some sort of DADA class from Snape. Either he's giving them remedial DADA lessons or they're repeating fifth-year DADA. (Surely he wouldn't talk about their repeating their DADA OWL if they weren't taking any DADA lessons at all.) So what does this situation tell us about Snape? We know that he didn't want anyone except the very best students in his Potions class, but DADA seems to be different. In the first place, he doesn't take only O students. If he did, his NEWT DADA class would probably be limited to Harry. (Even Hermione got an E rather than an O in DADA; so, probably, did Ron and the other D.A. members. It's even possible that there are students in the class who received A for Acceptable.) And he's even, apparently, willing to make special arrangements for students who failed their DADA OWL, which he certainly would not have done for students who failed Potions. I can think of only two reasons for this attitude. One is that he has no patience with people who dislike Potions and are no good at it; he has no desire to pamper dunderheads. But that could hold true for DADA as well, even though he's dealing with misfiring spells rather than Potions disasters. The other, which I think is more likely, is that he really thinks DADA is important, especially now that Voldemort is returning to power, even for dim-witted students who failed their OWLs the first time around. Granted, these are students in his own House, and we don't see him doing such favors for other students, but then Crabbe and Goyle are probably the dumbest kids in their year, and the Slytherins didn't have the advantage of D.A. lessons from Harry. At any rate, whether DADA is really his favorite subject or not, and whether he has really wanted the position all this time despite the so-called jinx on it (I think it's more of a curse), he certainly doesn't share Draco's view that DADA is "a joke" and "an act." I think he realizes that DADA is probably at this point the most important subject in the school and he's making sure that as many people as possible learn it. I think it's significant that he's teaching *about* the Unforgiveable Curses without casting them, that he's focusing on nonverbal defensive spells as the most important skill they can learn, and that he has an alternate means of dealing with Dementors for people who don't have Harry's experience in casting Expecto Patronum while their happiness is being sucked out. So, IMO, Snape really is giving Crabbe and Goyle detention because of their dismal marks in remedial DADA, but he's doing so with the ulterior motive of thwarting Draco's mission. Possibly he's showing favoritism to the Slytherins by allowing them to repeat the class (though he certainly would not have done so if the class were Potions), but it's because, IMO, of the importance to them all of DADA this year. IOW, he emphatocally disagrees with Draco's statement that "*we*" don't need protection from the Dark Arts. Thoughts, anybody? Carol From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Fri May 12 03:20:36 2006 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 03:20:36 -0000 Subject: Regarding Snape calling Tonks Nyphadora... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152135 I think the meaning is a little more simple.... I think he reminded Tonks of their "first name basis" due to their involvement with/belonging to the OOP... I believe he calls her that after she states that she, "sent the message to Hagrid.."...hence Snape in his oh-so double agent way...gives a subtle reminder that they are (supposed to be) on the same side. Yet another example of how Snape behaves when he is doubted.. I suppose if this is true then we must compare/contrast this with Snape's behavior towards Bella...(in MHO fairly similar) If Snape can intercept a message to Hagrid...How many more messages has he intercepted? I suppose if I was to subscribe to a "Snape theory"...it would have to be PMSnape (as in puppet master snape in his role as double agent)...I truly do believe that he revels his role as double agent. I don't think double agents ever truly want an end to the war...it would end their occupation. I love this theory because it explains ALL of Snape's behaviors that have both been suspect and championed. The one true glimpse we ever got of Snape was through the pensieve...Perhaps snape was fated to always be "torn between two"..(hence the two adults arguing and the small cowering boy in the corner...perhaps he never recovered) Doddie From erikog at one.net Fri May 12 04:18:57 2006 From: erikog at one.net (krista7) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 04:18:57 -0000 Subject: Regarding Snape calling Tonks Nyphadora... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152136 Doddie writes: > I think he reminded Tonks of their "first name basis" due to their > involvement with/belonging to the OOP... I think 1.) Snape is not given to informality in general, so he prefers to say "Nymphadora" vs. Tonks. "Tonks" doesn't sound dignified. (Doesn't he refer to Bellatrix as just "Bellatrix" when Bella and Cissy come a-visitin'? I doubt there's much argument about why he didn't say "Cissy"!) 2.) Is probably aware that by age and behavior, Tonks is just a step up from a student (perhaps a student he saw at Hogwarts?), and therefore, again, not someone to be buddy-buddy with; 3.) is perhaps following Dumbledore's lead in the choice of her name (as somebody else mentioned); 4.) is likely very jealous of Tonks' ability to be very open about her personality, to make a fool of herself regularly, to change her colors at will and wildly, to just be herself. Snape is far too restricted to be able to do any of those things that Tonks does regularly, just by being her happy-go-lucky self; 5.) Is probably resentful/irritated that Tonks dared to love, be open about her emotions in re: that love, and that she lets her emotions sideline/have an impact on her job performance (given that Snape is all about compartmentalizing your emotions in order to get the job done. Fools and their hearts, y'know.) Krista > I suppose if this is true then we must compare/contrast this with > Snape's behavior towards Bella...(in MHO fairly similar) > > If Snape can intercept a message to Hagrid...How many more messages > has he intercepted? > > I suppose if I was to subscribe to a "Snape theory"...it would have > to be PMSnape (as in puppet master snape in his role as double > agent)...I truly do believe that he revels his role as double agent. > I don't think double agents ever truly want an end to the war...it > would end their occupation. > > I love this theory because it explains ALL of Snape's behaviors that > have both been suspect and championed. The one true glimpse we ever > got of Snape was through the pensieve...Perhaps snape was fated to > always be "torn between two"..(hence the two adults arguing and the > small cowering boy in the corner...perhaps he never recovered) > > Doddie > From enlil65 at gmail.com Fri May 12 05:55:15 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 00:55:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Another look at the Prophesy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1789c2360605112255p384db3d5yea28100d98ab3cb3@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152137 On 5/11/06, Tonks wrote: > Musing on the Prophesy. > > I think I might be on to something, but I don't know how it can play > out, so we may be no further ahead. > > LV= death > Lily = sacrificial love > Harry = human life > > Death + sacrificial love = life > > "One can not live while the other survives" death can not exist > while life is present and life can not exist when death is present. > > I don't really know where to go with this. But like the riddle of > the Sphinx it makes the prophesy understandable, I think. > > Comments?? Peggy W: I'm sure there will be some symbolic interpretation in there at some level somewhere, but I expect it to play out in a literal sense, as well. Also, note that your paraphrase is a little off; this part is: "either must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives". In thinking about this recently, it elicits an image for me that is similar to the Priori Incantatum effect (hope I spelled that right) in the GOF graveyard scene: I imagine it as the two of them pushing a force (the failed curse, that is) back and forth between them, and it's uncertain which one will "win" (like the bead of light that is pushed between their wands in GOF). They will most likely have to be touching each other (the literal version of "at the hand of the other"). The touching has been foreshadowed in PS/SS but back then Harry's touch was physically damaging; that has now changed. Why like Priori Incantatum? Their (brother) wands were equals; they are equals. The "either must die" makes it sound like it could go either way, which is why I see it as a pushing back and forth of a force. The "either" also makes it seem as if the outcome is far from certain; it could go either way. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri May 12 09:56:15 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 09:56:15 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152138 Carol: > So what does this situation tell us about Snape? We know that he didn't want anyone except the very best students in his Potions class, but DADA seems to be different. In the first place, he doesn't take only O students. If he did, his NEWT DADA class would probably be limited to Harry. *(snip)* And he's even, apparently, willing to make special arrangements for students who failed their DADA OWL, which he certainly would not have done for students who failed Potions. Ceridwen: The first thing I thought when I read your post is, Snape didn't teach DADA until this year. He begins Harry's class by discussing the five previous teachers and their different methods. Then he says he's surprised any of them made it to the higher-level class and doubts if they'll be able to keep up with the work. So, I think that if he had been teaching DADA all along, if that wasn't impossible that is, he would probably have only taken the highest scorers as he does with Potions. I could be wrong, the subject itself might be less attractive to students so he might open it up a little wider. He may have given remedial lessons to students who had trouble with Potions. When Draco heard that excuse in OotP, he didn't ridicule the idea of Snape giving remedial lessons, if I recall correctly, he ridiculed Harry for having to take them. I believe that Snape sees DADA as important. It could be as simple as every teacher believing their own subject is the most important as Slughorn said to Trelawney. Or it could be his awareness, based on his inside knowledge of LV's feelings and his DEs, that the lessons in DADA will indeed be necessary. Giving Crabbe and Goyle remedial lessons may also help if or when Draco decides he doesn't want to throw in with LV. C&G are Draco's 'goons', they're his protection. They will need to know how to counter Dark magic if LV sends DEs after Draco. And with Draco's attitude, he'll need their help. It doesn't sound as if he's too serious about the subject himself. Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri May 12 10:36:49 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:36:49 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152139 Nick: > Look at all this hate for Ginny! In my view, Ginny only takes out her anger on people who deserve it. Ceridwen: So, in your view, is it all right for anyone to take out their anger on people who deserve it? Or, on people you decide must deserve it, without due process? Nick: > Ron had no business telling her off and (stopping just short of) calling her a slut. Zacharias Smith had no business questioning her inclusion on the team and calling it favoritism. Ceridwen: Ron, as her brother, will be more critical of her than anyone else. His underlying concern will also be more personal than another person's - the WW seems like a conservative society where things like this is concerned; he is trying to protect her reputation. True, he did it poorly. But, as you imply yourself, siblings have a special relationship. They will yell when they really only care. Zacharias Smith has every right to question her inclusion. No one has the duty to give it a second thought. It raises an issue that a lot of students probably thought but didn't dare to say to Harry. At one point, when Harry tags Dean to take Katie Bell's place on the team, he knows he'll be criticized for admitting another one of his classmates. I read that as his being criticized by Gryffindor, since he felt added pressure to win their first game with Slytherin with the substitution in place. Zacharias is not in Gryffindor, so he is just exercising his right to criticize. It isn't his business, and it isn't any skin off his nose if Harry holds trials by checking his address book. But he should have the freedom to express his doubts and his snide remarks no matter how stupid and inconsequential they may be. Ginny hexing him, *merely for criticizing* her and her inclusion on the team probably lent more credence to what he was saying than if she had just called him an idiot and stalked haughtily away. Nick: > Also let's not forget the haughty disdainful Fleur of GOF in deciding whether the chicken of Ginny's dislike came before the egg of Fleur's attitude. Additionally, we know for a fact that she sticks up for Luna. Ceridwen: Is that how you saw Fleur? I had the impression she was in over her head, a thoroughly ineffective person, in GoF. She's sidelined from two tasks, after all. If Ginny is reacting to this sort of character (Fleur, Smith) in such over the top ways, she seems to have some issues which should be dealt with. On who Bill decides to marry, Ginny has no business butting in. She can dislike Fleur as much as she wants. But she will never live Bill's life. Only Bill will do that. Ginny cannot give an adequate replacement for the woman Bill loves. Ginny certainly can't *be* that person! It's none of her business. Period. Any more than it's Smith's business how Harry chooses the members of his team. If Harry's hand-picked team lets him down, Smith can feel superior for having known it; if Fleur turns out to be the wife from Hades, Ginny can get up on her moral high horse and say 'I knew it'. Yes, I am comparing Ginny to Smith and seeing parallels. She does stick up for Luna. But she also referrs to her as 'Looney' outside of her hearing. I think she and Luna are true friends. But Ginny has a mean streak, too - maybe she just wants to be part of the gang. Nick: > She's an instrument of Justice; if you mess with Ginny, you reap what you sow. Ceridwen: Uh, no. This is saying that she's a vigilante, and that's fine and dandy merely because she's on Harry's side. Ginny is a fifteen year old character. Fifteen year olds do not have a grasp of the larger picture. They are very black and white in their responses to things - according to Mead, they are still in the Game Stage, still learning the rules. An apprentice is not sent out on a master's mission. Wreaking righteous vengeance is a master's job, not one meant for someone still learning the ropes. Ginny acts immediately, without due consideration. Is this the sort of justice anybody really wants? Sure, it's fine if you agree with the avenger. But what if it is turned on you, and you lose due process? Nick: > I hate to break it to everyone, but we're supposed to LIKE Ginny. We're supposed to laugh at her jokes. We're supposed to approve of her behavior. I, for one, think she's hilarious, ballsy, vivacious, and probably extremely hot. Harry deserves no less. Ceridwen: I don't care what we're *supposed* to do. Ginny comes off as someone who has unresolved issues. Maybe Rowling won't go there. She only has one book in which to wrap things up. But Ginny as presented in HBP does not come across to me as anything other than highly-strung. Her jokes are mean-spirited and meant to hurt. I don't think that's funny. I do not appreciate the author coming out and telling me what I ought to feel for a character. I prefer to let the author's writing inform me through the process of the story. You apparently read the character differently than I do. That's fine, it stimulates discussion. Nick: > Do y'all have bad experiences with these types of people? Ceridwen: Isn't that the point? We all bring our own backgrounds into reading a story. So, yes, I have seen people like Ginny in life. And I've seen that after a while, people start to dislike the overbearing attitude and the insinuation that these people know better for everyone's life than the people they criticize. Often, people like this develop a double standard - their friends can get away with things because they're young, feeling their oats, only human, and so on, while the people they don't particularly care about ought to maintain a strict and unflinching behavior and any deviation is to be condemned. Personally, I'm beginning to like Ginny. But not because she's so hateful to the people she doesn't like and sees no problem in criticizing them for doing the same things her friends can get away with in her opinion. It's because there seems to be something more underneath which might explain her very tense and sneering behavior. There seems to be a depth that hasn't been explored, and I do wonder if she is still suffering from her brush with Teenage!Tom Riddle. I snipped your question about having siblings since I addressed it earlier in my reply. Ceridwen. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri May 12 12:59:15 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 12:59:15 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152140 Carol wrote: > So, IMO, Snape really is giving Crabbe and Goyle detention because of > their dismal marks in remedial DADA, but he's doing so with the > ulterior motive of thwarting Draco's mission. Possibly he's showing > favoritism to the Slytherins by allowing them to repeat the class > (though he certainly would not have done so if the class were > Potions), but it's because, IMO, of the importance to them all of DADA > this year. IOW, he emphatocally disagrees with Draco's statement that > "*we*" don't need protection from the Dark Arts. > > Thoughts, anybody? Ginger, with thoughts: I snipped most of what you had to say, because I agree with it. I would like to expand a bit. I think another possibility is that Snape is trying to get C&G alone in the hopes that they will spill on whatever Draco is up to. We know (because Harry has overheard) that they have no idea of Draco's plans, but Snape doesn't know that, although I am sure they have told him so. "Honest, Sir, we don't know." Yeah, right. Obviously, they are taking remedial DADA, and they aren't doing well. If they are the only remedial students, Snape could be making sure they aren't doing well by adding a rediculous amount of work to the normal courseload to be sure they are put in detention. Just an outside thought: In what could those two lunkheads have actually gotten OWLS? There's a difference between getting an OWL and advancing to NEWTS. C&G are, at this point, just trying to get an OWL. We know from the brochures from Harry's 4th year that there are jobs out there where one only needs an OWL in something to be considered for hiring. Perhaps C&G just need an OWL for their career plans. Security troll replacement squad? So Snape teaching them remedial DADA doesn't necessarily mean that he would accept them into his NEWT class. OTOH, it could. Or he (as DDM) could just have seen an opportunity to pretend to be helping the DEs but really be teaching them bunk that will make them a burden to LV. "I tried, my Lord, but they are unteachable." Ginger, cheering Carol on her summary. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri May 12 13:20:28 2006 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 13:20:28 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152141 > Nick: > > Ron had no business telling her off and (stopping just short of) > calling her a slut. Zacharias Smith had > no business questioning her inclusion on the team and calling it > favoritism. > > Ceridwen: (snip) > Zacharias Smith has every right to question her inclusion. No one > has the duty to give it a second thought. (snip) Zacharias is not in Gryffindor, so he is > just exercising his right to criticize. It isn't his business, and > it isn't any skin off his nose if Harry holds trials by checking his > address book. But he should have the freedom to express his doubts > and his snide remarks no matter how stupid and inconsequential they > may be. Ginny hexing him, *merely for criticizing* her and her > inclusion on the team probably lent more credence to what he was > saying than if she had just called him an idiot and stalked haughtily > away. Ginger: Um, maybe I'm misunderstanding here, which could easily be the case as we usually tend to agree on things. Are you saying the Zach had the "right" to his opinion (agreed there) and to express that opinion in a public forum where he was, theoretically, supposed to be commentating in an unbiased manner? Sure, he as as much right as anyone to wander the halls pontificating loudly on proper management techniques, but is he in the right to harp on that point in his position as commentator? Had he brought up negative points about Ginny's play, he would have been just doing his job, but we've seen that Ginny is a good player who has earned her place on the team. Note that he shut up on that after she scored 4 of the team's 6 goals. The part that I am questioning whether or not I understand correctly is where you said, "Zacharias Smith has every right to question her inclusion. No one has the duty to give it a second thought." Did you mean that Zach has a right to his opinion and no one has the right to express disagreement? Perhaps I am jaded by RL here. I hate it when someone says "IMO, blah, blah, blah" and if you try to say "I disagree" they get huffy that you are violating their right to their opinion. You see it all the time in Political Correctness. Maybe I'm bringing my own baggage to your statement. I would think that Zach has every right to say what he wants in everyday life, and that others have every right to disagree, but that in a public forum where an unbiased commentation is called for, his opinion needs to have a real base rather than just snide remarks. He can certainly make negative comments, but he had best have facts to back them up. That's just good reporting. Personally, I got a charge out of Ginny there. He tried to humiliate her in public because of his private dislike for her. He got public humiliation right back in his face. Ginger, who likes Ginny because Ginny has the guts to do and say the things I *wish* I had the guts to do and say. Probably why I like Snape. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri May 12 14:10:48 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 14:10:48 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152142 Ginger: > Are you saying the Zach had the "right" to his opinion (agreed there) and to express that opinion in a public forum where he was, theoretically, supposed to be commentating in an unbiased manner? Sure, he as as much right as anyone to wander the halls pontificating loudly on proper management techniques, but is he in the right to harp on that point in his position as commentator? Had he brought up negative points about Ginny's play, he would have been just doing his job, but we've seen that Ginny is a good player who has earned her place on the team. Note that he shut up on that after she scored 4 of the team's 6 goals. Ceridwen: I went a bit off the deep end, I think. But, since I did open mouth and insert foot: Smith was just trying out for the commentator's position, if I recall right. Wouldn't it be better to see that he is incapable of being unbiased at his try-outs? Not that the WW seems to care about bias. But, point taken. He didn't have any business spouting his personal opinion in that venue. His job was to describe the game for the benefit of spectators. I still don't agree with Ginny's over the top performance, even if it was funny and even though I do think Smith was a jerk. Ginny reacted in anger, not in considered thought. I stop short of my mother's teaching that if he's wrong, someone else should do the defending or it looks like everyone agrees with him if you have to do it. But, calling him out, making a date to duel, perhaps, to show she isn't just reacting (perhaps with a guilty conscience? as the Slytherins might think) to his being a jerk, in my opinion, would have been better. Ginger: > The part that I am questioning whether or not I understand correctly is where you said, "Zacharias Smith has every right to question her inclusion. No one has the duty to give it a second thought." Did you mean that Zach has a right to his opinion and no one has the right to express disagreement? Ceridwen: Absolutely not! Sorry if I wasn't clear. He has the right to his opinion (outside of the job, of course). No one has to listen to him. If they do listen, or if they find him too annoying to ignore any longer, sure, tell him off. If Smith has the right to his opinon, then he has to expect differences of opinion. He shouldn't be the only one able to express himself. But, when he does, he has no right to expect anyone to agree, or to even listen. My own baggage may be showing here. I know people who think their opinion is the only valid opinion, and they insist that everyone agree. Some can become extremely obnoxious about it, too. I was *assuming* Smith may be this sort of person, and stating that, despite this attitude among people of strong opinion, no - no one has any duty to listen to nonsense if that's how they see it, and no one has to agree just because Smith is bad-mouthing Harry, Ginny and the Gryffindor team. Ginger: > I would think that Zach has every right to say what he wants in everyday life, and that others have every right to disagree, but that in a public forum where an unbiased commentation is called for, his opinion needs to have a real base rather than just snide remarks. He can certainly make negative comments, but he had best have facts to back them up. That's just good reporting. Ceridwen: As I mentioned, I think I just went over the top myself in my reply. He shouldn't spout opinion during commentary. Hopefully, he put himself out of the running for that slot. But I will bet that Smith expressed the same opinions out of the booth as well. Slightly off-topic: I only recall two contenders for the commentator spot. Luna's commentary was as biased, but pro Ginny/Gryffindor. I *think* Luna is the sort to be trying to redress the Smith commentary. Either way, no one had any objectivity that I noticed in the commentator try-outs. > Ginger, who likes Ginny because Ginny has the guts to do and say the things I *wish* I had the guts to do and say. Probably why I like Snape. Ceridwen: Heh-heh, same for Snape, really. I could tell you tales... But I won't. I'm starting to pay a lot more attention to Ginny's character now that we're seeing more of it. I think there's something going on, as I mentioned probably too many times already. I wish JKR would at least give us a book 7 title to pick apart! Ceridwen. From cassy_ferris at yahoo.com Fri May 12 07:29:15 2006 From: cassy_ferris at yahoo.com (Cassy Ferris) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 11:29:15 +0400 (MSD) Subject: Social Structure in the WW (was:Re: Hero types / Why Snape must...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060512072915.15853.qmail@web38306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152143 horridporrid03 wrote: Money really doesn't count in this sort of social system, I think. Middle class Hermione is seen as being on the same level as the working class Creeveys and the upper class Justin. They are, all of them, muggleborn. And sure, it hasn't affected them while they're at Hogwarts (except for their inability to study to the same effect as their wizarding classmates over the holidays) but I'm near positive it will effect them when they go looking for work. Especially within the Ministry. Cassy: I think it's true. At least we have evidence that it was so half a century ago. Tom Riddle replied to Slughorn, when the latter predicted Tom good job at the Ministry, that he didn't have right family background (forgive me for not provideing an accurate quotation, don't have an English variant of HBP). And Riddle was the brightest student of Hogwards, got a special reward for sevices for school and still couldn't count on making a good career because of being (presumably) muggle-born! Cassy From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 12 16:33:19 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 16:33:19 -0000 Subject: Social Structure in the WW In-Reply-To: <20060512072915.15853.qmail@web38306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152145 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Cassy Ferris wrote: > > And Riddle was the brightest student of Hogwards, got a special reward for sevices for school and still couldn't count on making a good career because of being (presumably) muggle-born! > Tonks: This brings up an interesting point. I am sure that we have explored this before. But remind me, please. If Tom was in a Muggle orphanage, and his mother died at his birth, how did anyone know that she was a witch? He is a half-blood, not a Muggle born. But how did anyone know? The WW just seems to "know" which kids have the gift of magic so that they can invite them to come to Hogwarts. But if all of her family is gone and she died at the birth of Tom, how did anyone know that Tom's mother was a witch? And how did they know that she was in the line of Slytherin? And if the WW knew, why did they allow Tom to stay in a Muggle orphanage? Surly someone would have know that he would start to show signs of magic and would not be treated well in a totally Muggle environment. Does the WW have orphanages? We never hear of any. Sounds like kids go to live with other relatives. What about wizard kids who lose all of their relatives? Tonks_op From belviso at attglobal.net Fri May 12 16:40:34 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 16:40:34 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152146 > Nick : > I hate to break it to everyone, but we're supposed to LIKE Ginny. > We're supposed to laugh at her jokes. We're supposed to approve of > her behavior. I, for one, think she's hilarious, ballsy, vivacious, > and probably extremely hot. Harry deserves no less. > > Do y'all have bad experiences with these types of people? Magpie: I think the fact that we're supposed to like Ginny is irrelevent. In answer to the last question, I would have to say that apparently I find any experience with these types of people (or at least this version) to be bad experiences. When I think of anyone in real life post-GoF Ginny reminds me of they do indeed bring up all negative memories. But that's why it's pointless to argue subjective experiences. I can't find Ginny amusing or likable because I'm supposed to, I can only have my own honest reaction, and it's not a completely unique reaction. I don't think characters deserve their scenes with Ginny-- even if I think the other person has done something wrong, iirc. In a case like that, where you respond to a character differently than the author does, feeling the authorial opinion nudging at you just makes you like or dislike a character more, not less. This is probably the way anybody feels in these situations--it just makes you think the other person is the one with the weird taste or the one who isn't seeing the character the way s/he "really is." If I were writing the book I'd get more satisfaction out of putting this character on the receiving end of her behavior intead of having her dish it out. To each his own. This is one of those ways fiction mirrors real life after all. It's not like in real life people can can go up to people who seriously dislike them and say, "But you're supposed to like me! Everyone deserves the treatment I give them! I'm sassy and excellent and cool, and I'm really funny!" It's been mentioned that Ginny does and says things others are afraid to do in life and there's good reason for that. In real life you don't have an author pulling the strings to make all your rude remarks and violent actions turn out well. -m From meriaugust at yahoo.com Fri May 12 16:51:10 2006 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 16:51:10 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152147 Meri - Great summary Carol! > Discussion Questions: > > 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with Lavender > and Hermione's reaction? What about Ron's and Hermione's behavior in > Transfiguration? What does Harry (whose thoughts are paraphrased by > the narrator) mean by "the depths to which girls would sink to get > revenge"? Meri - Ah, teenage romance. Makes me miss the good old days...a little. Anyway, teenagers invariably make poor, emotional and rash decisions when it comes to such matters and then, by learning from their mistakes, figure out how to behave in situations such as this. If they never spent time with the wrong people how on earth would Ron and Hermione ever figure out who the right person was? And as to the "revenge" statement, I don't know about anyone else, but I think boys can be just as cruel when it comes to matters of the heart, just as manipulative and just as angry. snip > > 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on Everlasting > Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's aspersions and > Madam Pince's grasping hands. Is he just using the Prince's notes to > get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the > Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? How > might this new interest in Potions, if it lasts, play out in Book 7? Meri - I look at Harry's relationship with the book as a positve (and wholly ironic) one. This is just another example of Harry's Slytherin side, his "reckless disregard for the rules" and his acceptance of ideas that come from outside the box. Using this book to his own advantage (and against Hermione's advice) is maybe not necessarily the most correct thing to do, but the book is in fact helping Harry to earn higher grades in Potions class than he ever has before. snip > 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? What > does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or contrasted with > Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Do you agree with Harry that > Hermione got what she deserved when Cormac ambushed her under the > mistletoe? Why or why not? Meri - I think Harry considers Luna a friend and ally and knows that she'll be someone fun to hang out with (and let's face it, Ron and Hermione aren't that much fun to be around at the moment). He accepts Luna for her eccentricities and quirks and is becoming more mature; coolness doesn't matter so much to him anymore. And while Harry invited Luna not only because he wanted to hang out with her but because he felt bad that she was lonely, Hermione invited Cormac to tick off Ron, which did achieve its objective. And yes, I'd say she deserved what she got, inviting him to the party. She asked for it, didn't she? snip > 9) Draco's appearance suggests that he's suffering from stress or > insomnia. Do you think that he was really too ill to play Quidditch > (previous chapter)? How do you account for the change in his attitude > toward his Head of House and former favorite professor? What > parallels, if any, do you see between this relationship and Harry's > with Dumbledore? Meri - Draco doesn't think he needs Snape anymore. He's been asked by Voldemort himself to take out the Albus Dumbledore. Why should he need help from someone like Snape? If Snape is so smart why didn't LV ask *him* to kill DD? I personally always thought Draco's fawning over Snape was a little bit of sucking up, just keeping on the Prof.'s good side knowing that if he does he can probably get away with anything and knowing from Lucius that Snape was once a Death Eater probably gave Draco a little insight/hold over Snape as well. snape > 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt at > Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his > accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? How successful are > his attempts to evade Snape's questions? What, if anything, does Snape > learn from Draco's answers? Meri - Draco feels he is above school now, and he's probably only there to complete his mission from LV. He's got better teachers now (like Aunt Bella and LV) and doesn't need the education (or the lifestyle) that Hogwarts can offer him. His full contempt for the place can now be shown. But this, too, can be misleading, because Draco really isn't doing this for his own glory (althouigh he might want to think that he is and he will do his best to project that facade), he's doing this because LV will kill him and his mother and father if he fails in his mission. Draco loves his family and they love him back, and even if LV doesn't really understand that love he can still exploit it for his own ends. Sorry to get a little OT, but I think this is important to emphasize. This bluster of Draco's (and the bad boy attitude that went with it) was probably mostly an act. snip > 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's loyalties > lie? Why do you think the chapter is titled "The Unbreakable Vow" when > the vow is barely mentioned? Meri - Well, I don't know whose side he's on, that's for sure. Snape is playing, I think, the ultimate Slytherin. His loyalties lie with himself and no one else because if he doesn't project that face to the world he's dead. I think DD trusted Snape for a legitimate reason and I think Snape did, in fact, abandon the Death Eaters before LV's fall and that he did turn spy for the Order at great risk to his life. And I think I believe that DD was informed by Snape what the Unbreakable Vow was and what he had to do. And I think DD's murder was all part of a larger plan. But there is one thing that I keep going back to that makes me question whose side Snape is really on now: the deaths of two Order members (Emmaline Vance and Amelia Bones) because of information that Snape provided. Now I know DD believed in sacrafice, but I'm sure even he would not approve of sacrificing the lives of two members of the Order just to preserve Snape's cover. And as to why this chapter is titled as it is, I can only assume that it is because this is the first Harry learns about the vow. Meri - in the middle of her annual summer HP readathon! From annagyorfi at citromail.hu Fri May 12 08:04:05 2006 From: annagyorfi at citromail.hu (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?gy=F5rfi_anna?=) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:04:05 +0200 Subject: Is Hermione pretty? WAS: Re: CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis Message-ID: <20060512080405.17018.qmail@server05.citromail.hu> No: HPFGUIDX 152148 Angie: I think it's important to remember that nowhere is Hermione described as pretty minluko: It is not exactly right. Just reread "The Yule Ball" chapter in GoF: "Krum was at the front of the party, accompanied by a pretty girl in blue robes...". Also, this McLaggen guy in HBP doesn't seem like someone who will go out with a plain girl. Doddie here: Not to mention that out of every single girl at Hogwarts and all the fans he has throwing themselves at him, Victor asked Hermione.. Harry describes Hermione as he would a sister...I always viewed Hermione as one who "cleans up well" (I view ron the same way)... I like that Hermione doesn't spend hours on her hair every day. She should "dress-up/make-up" when she feels like it not because of what other's may think. I love that she's comfortable in her own skin. Angie again: Well, I stand corrected -- I forgot about the Yule Ball thing. But that's the only explicit reference, right? I know elsewhere Harry tells her he doesn't think she's ugly, but that's not quite the same thing, in my book. I'm not saying Hermione's unnattractive. I just don't know if she believes she is attractive, which would affect her self esteem, especially since Ron is so obviously attracted to Fleur, who is apparently quite fetching. :) There also seems a stark contrast to me between the way Fleur and Ginny are described, compared to Hermione -- like JKR goes out of her way to point out that Hermione may not be "conventionally" pretty. And don't get me wrong. I think that's a great message for young girls, most of whom are not like Fleur and Ginny. And Ron and McLaggen and Victor were obviously attracted to her, for whatever reasons. So really, she can't be all that shabby in the looks department. From lauciricad at yahoo.com Fri May 12 15:22:31 2006 From: lauciricad at yahoo.com (Don L.) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 15:22:31 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152149 I would be very surprised if JKR wrote the Dumbledore confrontation with the Dursleys at the beginning of HBP in response to criticism. There is no requirement to make heroes more heroic, villains more villainous, worlds for unworldly but it almost always occurs in literature and is what makes books of fantasy interesting and enjoyable. I for one do not think JKR had bowed or should bow to criticism for her fictional characters' faults any more than she should stop writing the series because of criticism from some parts because of the misplaced fear that young readers may become Satan's followers or read more redeeming books less. As a boy I daydreamed in school about such worlds as Heinlein and Tolkien, where parents were non-existant, where rules, science and history were lost, where characters like Snape and LV were defeated by me and on occasion my friends. As an adult I understand daydreams for what they are ? a memory, and on occasion a book like the Harry Potter Series resonates, taking me back, if not for short periods, to a time and place when I had the time to aimlessly daydream. JKR's world is of wizardry, where wizarding justice is reduced to a political farce called the Wizengamot allowing children to be put on trial, where children are allowed wands, learn spells, and fly on unsafe broomsticks. Got it. But IMO without the author's license to create world and characters however flawed, the book is less the fantasy and approaches non-fiction, and I get enough of political correctness from the nightly news. I enjoy the JKR books and this forum for what they are - entertainment. Conversely, I detest the idea that an author must conform her story, her world and her characters particularly Snape or DD, judged and criticized on narrow definitions of repentance and redemption. Don L. From dougsamu at golden.net Fri May 12 13:17:00 2006 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 09:17:00 -0400 Subject: Another look at the Prophecy In-Reply-To: <1147401805.3829.52678.m26@yahoogroups.com> References: <1147401805.3829.52678.m26@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <1B5F222F-5409-49A3-B6CE-547E9CA7FB18@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152150 From: "Tonks" : > LV= death > Lily = sacrificial love > Harry = human life > > Death + sacrificial love = life > > "One can not live while the other survives" death can not exist > while life is present and life can not exist when death is present. > > I don't really know where to go with this. But like the riddle of > the Sphinx it makes the prophecy understandable, I think. doug: I think the formula adds up quite nicely for countering Avada Kadavra, a Death wish imposed on others. As to applying it to the prophecy, I personally, don't think it stretches quite that far. I think if you apply a christian kind of reading, maybe, as applied to a single life-line. There may be something there in the sense that maybe Voldemort and Harry share the same Life, or soul... Why are Humans the only primates with chins and nuclear weapons? ____________________ From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 17:38:05 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 17:38:05 -0000 Subject: Social Structure in the WW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152151 Tonks wrote: > > If Tom was in a Muggle orphanage, and his mother died at his birth, > how did anyone know that she was a witch? > > He is a half-blood, not a Muggle born. But how did anyone know? > > The WW just seems to "know" which kids have the gift of magic so > that they can invite them to come to Hogwarts. But if all of her > family is gone and she died at the birth of Tom, how did anyone know > that Tom's mother was a witch? And how did they know that she was in > the line of Slytherin? Carol responds: I've never considered this question from quite this perspective. That is, I've never considered that others might think Tom was a Muggleborn. Certainly Tom himself assumed, from the moment he found out he was a wizard, that one of his parents was magical. (He assumed that it was his father, since his mother couldn't save herself from death in childbirth.) Maybe the Sorting Hat knew that he was a Half-Blood? I don't think it would have placed a Muggleborn in Slytherin under any circumstances because of the prejudice such a child would have to endure from his own House. I do think the Hat would have sensed the boy's affinity with Salazar Slytherin, maybe even his descent from him. And Tom's fellow Slytherins would have assumed, I think, that at least one of his parents was magical simply because Muggle-borns aren't sorted into Slytherin. And Tom himself would have kept his mouth shut about his parentage until he had investigated it and found something to brag about. As for learning that Slytherin was his ancestor, we know that Tom found that out himself through research. Failing to find anything on anyone named Riddle, he must have followed up on the one lead he had, the name Marvolo. And while I don't think that Marvolo and his children attended Hogwarts (I'm not even sure that they could read, since they sent the MoM owl away), he might have found somewhere, certainly before his fifth year when he released the Basilisk and wrote the diary, that the last remaining descendants of Slytherin were Marvolo Gaunt and his children. (Diary!Tom knows that his witch mother married a Muggle and that his grandfather and mother were descended from Slytherin.) Certainly he would have found out very quickly, from his fellow Slytherins, that Parseltongue was a rare gift that he shared with Slytherin himself. So another route he might have taken would be to consult the genealogical charts to determine whether he might be descended from Salazar. And he would, I think, have found the name Marvolo Gaunt, along with Merope and Morfin, there. (If the charts are magically updated, he might even have found his own name at the bottom of the chart.) And very quickly, perhaps in his first few days at Hogwarts, he would have found out about the Chamber of Secrets, openable only by the Heir of Slytherin. Putting the two things together, his descent and his ability to speak Parseltongue, he would have set out to find it and prove, if only to himself and his followers, that he was the Heir of Slytherin. (That his followers knew it and were duly impressed, is evident from Slughorn's memory. I wonder if they knew whose ring he wore and how he had obtained it.) By his fifth year, he had opened the Chamber (though only he and possibly his gang of future DEs knew that he had done so). And the following summer, in what JKR says was his sixteenth year but was really his seventeenth (he was sixteen going on seventeen), he sought out Marvolo Gaunt and instead found Morfin, who unwittingly gave him information that led to the murder of Tom's Muggle father and grandparents. Anyway, I don't think that anyone, at least not any Slytherins, assumed that Tom was a Muggleborn. Certainly he himself didn't. But the merest hint or suspicion on anyone's part, or any shadow of doubt on the part of his fellow Slytherins that he was the heir of their House's founder, might have fueled his hatred of Muggleborns and have been one reason why he unleashed the Basilisk on them. Carol, who still thinks that Myrtle's death counts as Tom's first murder because the Basilisk was his instrument (as a wand or knife is an instrument) in contrast to Wormtail, who as a human being was an agent, not an instrument, and could in theory have refused to kill Cedric (which, IMO, makes them equally guilty of Cedric's murder) From tab1669 at elnet.com Fri May 12 18:56:26 2006 From: tab1669 at elnet.com (flyingmonkeypurple) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 18:56:26 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152152 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > Nick: > > Look at all this hate for Ginny! In my view, Ginny only takes out > her anger on people who deserve it. > > Ceridwen: > So, in your view, is it all right for anyone to take out their anger > on people who deserve it? Or, on people you decide must deserve it, > without due process? > Flying monkey purple now: Ok if people have such a problem with the way Ginny acts, and if they deserve it or not. What about what Ron did to Hermione!!! Ron was mad at Hermione for Kissing Krum. He was being to cold to her, and he did not even ask her if this was true. Then he starts kissing Lavender to get back at Hermione for not believing in his Quidditch abilities. That was not nice at all. I think it's a Weasley thing Molly Weasley even has a mean streak. I think Ginny's great. She tells it like it is if Harry's being a prat she will tell him so. She will definitely keep Harry on his toes. Flyingmonkeypurple From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 19:26:55 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 19:26:55 -0000 Subject: Snape's "inscrutable" expression (Was: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152153 Carol earlier: > > 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? > SSSusan: > That, as usual, there's too much there in Snape that we readers > aren't yet supposed to know. Also, perhaps, that Harry just is no > damn good at reading Snape. ;-) Carol responds: Well, yes, JKR must keep up Snape's mystique so that he's unfathomable to the reader as well as to Harry or we'd know where Snape's loyalties lie, and what would be the fun in that? But I don't think the "inscrutable" or "unfathomable" expression(s) relate to Harry's POV, especially as Snape is similarly described from an objective POV in "Spinner's End." (His expression is "blank, unreadable" as Narcissa asks him to make the Unbreakable Vow, HBP Am. ed., 35. Clearly he doesn't want either of the women to know what he's thinking or feeling at that point.) "Smoothly inscrutable *again*" (321, my emphasis) suggests that he was wearing the same unreadable expression before Draco entered the room and/or that it's his usual expression (when he's not sneering). Harry is surprised to note a tinge of fear along with the anger. (While he's seen Snape angry, both coldly disapproving and hotly raging, he's seldom or never seen him show fear--unless we count the slight paleness before Snape goes out to "return" to Voldemort in GoF, where Harry has no idea what's going on.) Also, other people are present the first time Snape adjusts his expression in this chapter (Draco does the same thing, getting hold of himself and thanking Slughorn for allowing him to stay), but the second time, Snape is unaware of Harry's presence, and yet he's wearing an "unfathomable" expression when he has every reason to be at least as angry and afraid as he was before the interview with Draco. I think he assumes that expression before he leaves the room, so that no one who sees him will suspect that something is terribly wrong (i,e., he's failed to thwart Draco's plan to kill Dumbledore or even find out what that plan consists of; I won't go into the separate question of what, if anything, the interview accomplished though I'd like to hear other people's views on the subject). IOW, I think the "inscrutable" or "unfathomable" or "unreadable" expression that Snape assumes here and elsewhere (wish I had a concordance to discover exactly how often those adjectives are used with regard to Snape) relates to Snape's ability to act (also mentioned in this chapter and the next), and just possibly to Occlumency, which he may use as a defense against being "read" in an ordinary way by people who aren't Legilimens (or "Legilimentes," if the word is declined in the same way as "mens, mentis," the Latin term for "mind"). IMO, Snape habitually wears an unreadable expression as a form of self-defense, probably acquiring or developing this habit around the time he became a spy for Dumbledore "at great personal risk." Almost certainly his inscrutability has contributed to his success as a double agent, and quite possibility it, along with Occlumency, has enabled him to survive for the last twenty years. I certainly agree that Harry "is no damn good at reading Snape," but I think he's not alone in finding Snape inscrutable. IMO, Snape doesn't want to be read, not by Harry or Draco or Bellatrix or Narcissa or anyone else, with the possible exception of Dumbledore--and certainly not by *Draco's* master (note that he says "your master," not "our master"), the Dark Lord. Carol earlier: > > Why does Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? > > SSSusan: > Because there's no way Draco is going to let him follow him? Because he wants to get back to keeping his eye on Potter? Carol again: I agree that it would be futile at best to follow Draco, but I think he also returns because he doesn't want anyone to suspect that Draco is plotting to kill Dumbledore. (This wish is shared by Dumbledore, who is trying to protect both Draco and Snape.) You could be right that he also wants to keep an eye on Harry, in which case his suspicions will be aroused by Harry's absence. Do we have any indication that Snape is watching either Draco or Harry between this time and the argument with DD in the forest? Certainly he's watching one or the other at the time of the Sectumsempra incident. It can't be coincidence that Snape and only Snape shows up just in time to save Draco (as no one else could have done AFWK). Carol, looking forward to SSS's discussion of chapter 16 From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 12 20:12:31 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 20:12:31 -0000 Subject: Counter an AK (was Re: Another look at the Prophecy) In-Reply-To: <1B5F222F-5409-49A3-B6CE-547E9CA7FB18@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, doug rogers wrote: > doug: > > I think the formula adds up quite nicely for countering Avada > Kadavra, a Death wish imposed on others. Tonks: Hummmm.. I wonder if there is now, since Lily's sacrifice a way to counter the AK and people just don't realize it? What if Harry did some sort of Love, "live long and prosper" sort of spell at LV at the same time LV does an AK? Instead of a evil for evil curse like an AK for AK, which Harry did not do the first time either what if the counter curse isn't a "curse". What if it is something positive like Love for your enemy. When the Prior Incatatum occurred it was because of the wand cores but maybe also because it was not a unforgivable that Harry cast. What if he upped it a notch and instead of trying to disarm his enemy he shot Love at him. (gave him a box of love potion chocolates. ;-) I do wonder if there is a counter for the AK and no one knows it because before Lily everyone would have just tried to duck or run or AK back. ???? Tonks_op From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri May 12 20:30:58 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 20:30:58 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152155 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter > 15, The Unbreakable Vow. > > ...edited... > > Discussion Questions: > > 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with > Lavender and Hermione's reaction? What about Ron's and Hermione's > behavior in Transfiguration? What does Harry ... mean by "the > depths to which girls would sink to get revenge"? > bboyminn: I thought all of Ron's snogging was hilarious. He took Ginny's advise to heart and seized the most readily available source of that much needed experience. However, he learned very quickly that his relationship with Lavender doesn't come without a price. If he is going to 'snog' her, then she expects him to be her boyfriend and to ack like it. Ron, being a typical boy is interested in the practical physical aspects, but not so much the 'lovey-dovey' part of it. The 'lovey-dovey' and boyfriend aspect quickly wear thin and start to drive Ron away. Not having any experience in these matters, Ron doesn't have a clue how to end it. Like all men Harry and Ron clearly don't understand women, especially when it come to romance. Kids that age can be cruel even to their friends, and I think we are seeing a combination of these two things; a lack of understanding and a youthful sense of cruelty. Hermione feels hurt and the only way she has to expess that hurt is to hurt back in some way. > 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, > but Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is > Romilda's plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, > erm, potioning him? And how responsible are the Twins, who made > and sold the love potions, for the uses to which the potions are > put? > bboyminn: Well, the use of Love Potions is 'dark' in that it isn't very nice, but I don't think it is 'Dark' as in evil. It is not a very nice or ethical thing to do, but depending on your intent, it could be a hilariously cruel practical joke seeing a friend making a complete fool out of himself for an hour or two. So, I guess what I'm saying is that their could be some somewhat legitimate uses for love potions, but they can also be somewhat cruel, and can be used in somewhat unethical ways. I think in their own minds, Fred and George are placing the responsibility on the user as a way of abdicating their own responsibility. > 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on > Everlasting Elixirs and defends his book ... Is he just using the > Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really > learning more from the Prince than he ever learned from the adult > Snape or Slughorn? How might this new interest in Potions, if it > lasts, play out in Book 7? > bboyminn: I think Harry is learning that when left alone and unharassed, and given a proper set of instructions, he is quite capable of brewing potions effectively. I don't consider what Harry does as cheating. All the students are taking their instructions from a book. So this is not a test, using a book is not cheating. I've said before that I think Harry using an outside reference is probably well within the bounds of what would be allowed. Let's take a hypothetical, and assume you know you are going to take potion, and you also know that you have stuggled with it in the past. Let's us further assume you have reviewed the assigned textbook and found it somewhat out of date. I can't see any reason why you couldn't seek out the most up-to-date reference book on potions and use it as a suppliment. The students at Hogwarts have a very extensive library to aid them in their studies. If they know a particular Charm is coming up in Charms class, it is certainly not cheating to look up that Charm in several reference books in the library before attempting it in class. I don't see what Harry is doing as being any different than that. He is simply consulting supplimentary reference information on brewing potions, and apparently a supplimental reference that is far more accurate and up-to-date than the outmoded textbook that Slughorn has assigned. By having better working conditions and by having better reference material, Harry is able to brew better potions, and he is certainly learning from that experience. I think any other kid in the same class would be allowed to bring other reference material to class, so again, I don't see what Harry is doing as cheating. > 4) We later learn that Madam Pince is not the only person > listening behind the shelves: Draco is there as well. JKR is > clearly misleading the reader with a false or incomplete > explanation. Can you think of any other "explanations" that may > be revealed as misleading in the future? > bboyminn: I confess I completely missed the connection to Draco listening. I even scanned the books trying to find where the information is revealed but was at a loss. As to 'other' misleading explanation, I think it is safe to say that frequently in JKR's world things are not what they seem, and there will be plenty of stunning revelation in the next and final book. > 5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in > love? Is Harry right? > bboyminn: I think Harry was just making a snide comment, in a sense tying together two people he found barking mad. Yet, one never knows they could be getting hot and heavy between the shelves when no one is looking. > 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? > What does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or > contrasted with Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Do you > agree with Harry that Hermione got what she deserved when Cormac > ambushed her under the mistletoe? Why or why not? > bboyminn: I think Harry asked Luna because Luna's responses to him have always been honest and open. She does not want anything from him, and while well aware of his fame and to some extent impressed by it, she isn't attracked to the fame. She accepts Harry as just Harry. I think Harry find comfort in Luna's honesty and I think he asked her because she is the one person he can trust not to have ulterior motives in accepting. As far as Hermione, I think she certainly got what she deserved in asking McLaggen. She picked the person she thought would most annoy Ron forgetting that there was a very good reason why Ron and everyone else was generally annoyed by McLaggen; he's very annoying. > 7) What do you make of Luna's conversation with Trelawney? What > insights into Luna does this chapter provide, or is she strictly > comic relief? And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all > people, along with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his > former star pupil, Severus Snape? Just for fun, why do you think > JKR included the Vampire Sanguini as a party guest? > bboyminn: I think Trelawney was at the party because all the staff were invited. It was a Christmas Party and a chance for Slughorn to impress everyone with his connections. To some extent I think Luna and Trelawney's conversation was just 'filler'. It was a party and needed a range of pary-type interactions of people. I think this was also true of the Vampire, just interesting Party filler. We know Vampires exist in the wizard world, and this was a convinient and fun way to meet one. He acted just like I assumed he would act. As a late note; I have already pointed out the connection between the name Sanguini (sanguine) and the connection to blood. It's typical JKR to name a vampire, in a sense, 'blood'. > 7) Why does Snape react as he does to Slughorn's statement that > Harry is a "natural" at Potions? Are his suspicions aroused at > this point? Do you detect any genuine affection on Slughorn's > part for his brilliant former student, or is it all jovial > bluster and too much mead? Did you feel any sympathy for Snape > during this conversation? Why or why not? > bboyminn: I think we have seen several examples in several books that indicate if left alone and unharassed Harry is quite capable of brewing potions. Notice that Harry did get an 'E' (equivalent to a muggle 'B') in his potions OWL. Even Neville does a reasonable job if Snape isn't breathing down his neck. But at the same time, Snape would certainly and logically be suspicious of Harry's success. It's clear Snape is a brilliant potions maker, and I think Slughorn admires him for that. But I don't think Snape is too comfortable with the admiration. I think Snape likes the quiet life, he doesn't like being in the public eye very much. So, I do feel some small shred of sympathy for Snape since he is clearly uncomfortable in the situation. But, it is Snape's job to gather information, and I think he finds the information he is getting in the coversation to be very interesting. I will admit however, that I suspect that Snape finds it very suspicious that Harry is finally the darling of potions class. I'm sure he wonders how that can be. > 8) Why does Draco claim to be "gate-crashing" when he was actually > upstairs? Why does he look angry when Slughorn allows him to stay? > The narrator, voicing Harry's perspective, asks: "Why was Snape > looking at Malfoy as though both angry and . . . was it possible? . > . . a little afraid?" How would you answer the narrator's (or > Harry's) questions? > bboyminn: I think Draco finds 'gate-crashing' a very convinient excuss for lurking about the hallway. Though you are right, Draco was lurking no where near the party. I think he is hoping Slughorn will throw him out, and he can then get back to his work. The party was a perfect opportunity to continue that work, students and teachers were busy at the party, and the noise and distraction was the perfect cover for Draco's activities. I think Snape and Dumbledore know Draco is up to no good, but they really don't have any evidence that they can use against him. They suspect he is responsible for two attempts at murder, but suspicious are not proof, so there is not much they can do. Snape is angry and a little afraid because up to that point he has been unable to get Draco's cooperation, and because he's afraid of what will happen when Draco completes his mission. What if that very night is the night Draco intends to bring Death Eaters in the castle? He certainly has every valid reason to be angry and afraid. > 9) Draco's appearance suggests that he's suffering from stress > or insomnia. Do you think that he was really too ill to play > Quidditch(previous chapter)? How do you account for the change > in his attitude toward his Head of House and former favorite > professor? What parallels, if any, do you see between this > relationship and Harry's with Dumbledore? > bboyminn: I think Draco is finding the reality of being a Death Eater as being quite different than the romantic notions he has conjured up in his mind. I have said in the past that in Draco's mind he probably saw himself and his father standing shoulder to shoulder with Voldemort on a high balcony while the adoring crowds below bow down to them. Now he is finding that to be a Death Eater is bowing and scarping, and doing even the most menial task under the constant threat of torture or death. I speculated that Draco came to Voldemort with his idea for a way to get into the Castle. He never imagined Voldemort would heap the additional task of personally killing Dumbledore to it. Yet, he can't refuse. Voldemort as good as said that if Draco fails, Draco and his family will die, and that is a lot of pressure. The pressure and consequences of potential failure are weighing extremely heavy on Draco. I'm surprised he made it to the end of the book without collapsing. > 10) Clearly, Crabbe and Goyle are not taking NEWT DADA with Harry > and Draco. Might they be repeating fifth-year DADA ..., and could > they, theoretically, repeat their DADA OWLs as Snape implies? What, > if anything, does this detail tell us about Snape's attitude toward > DADA? Is he really concerned about Crabbe's and Goyle's DADA OWLs? > What is he trying to accomplish by putting them in detention? > bboyminn: I think OWLs are very important. It's very hard to move forward in life without them. So, I suspect that repeating an OWL level class is something the school would extend to anyone who requested it. I don't see it as special treatment of Crabbe and Goyle. I think Snape sees DADA as very important, and it seems reasonable that Crabbe and Goyle would want to at least pass that OWL. To not do so would imply that they are completely incapable of defending themselves against magical attack. That would seem disgracefull in the wizard world. So, to keep from being a laughing stock, they must at least scape a passing grade in the class. I think Snape put them in detention for the obious reason, they deserved it, but also because I think he is trying to deny Draco his resouces. It's clear from their conversation that Snape has been trying to get Draco to come and talk to him. Perhaps he thought using detention would be a way of compelling Draco to talk to him. > 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt > at Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his > accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? How > successful are his attempts to evade Snape's questions? What, if > anything, does Snape learn from Draco's answers? > bboyminn: Let's remember that DADA is Defense Against DARK ARTS. Draco sees himself as a practitioner of the Dark Art, and further backed up by a gang of 'Dark Artists' in the very near future. Why protect yourself against your own allies? Why protect yourself against something from which you preceive yourself as having nothing to fear. Draco distains Defense Against Dark Arts because he sees Dark Arts as his most powerful ally. As far as the 'steal his glory' comment. Draco knows, or at least believes, that if he is successful at defeating Dumbledore, he will become Voldemort 'darling'. He will have Voldemort's favor and with that comes great power. Again, Draco hasn't abandon all his romantic notions about being a Death Eater. Knowing this is probably his one chance to gain and hold great power, Draco is reluctant to share it with anyone. To some extent this is Draco being a typical naive 16 year old boy. He simply doesn't have enough life perspective to truly understand what is happening. What Snape learns for the conversation is that Draco is a dangerous little boy who doesn't completely understand that he is playing with the big boys now. > 12) Snape changes tactics several times during the interview. > How and why? Are these changes an indication of weakness or > strength? Do any of his statements or questions seem > deliberately ambiguous or misleading? How does this conversation > tie in with, or affect your understanding of, "Spinner's End"? > bboyminn: I think Snape is genuinely concerned about helping and protecting Draco, and I think that concern is independant of the Unbreakable Vow. I think Snape, relative to Draco, would have acted the same with or without the Vow. Snape seen the fallacy of supporting Voldemort, and I think he hopes he can gradually get Draco to see it as well. But Draco, as I said before, is still trapped in his romantic notions of power and glory to clearly see how doomed the world will be if Voldemort wins. But Snape must be very cautious. He can't come right out and tell Draco he is an idiot. If Snape wants to maintain his spy status, he needs to convert Draco in a very slow and cautious process. I think that now that Draco sees the true darkness of being a Death Eater, and now that he has heard Dumbledore's offer of protection, the ground work has been laid for Snape to convert Draco. I think when Snape, Draco, and Voldemort meet again, Snape will defend Draco by pointing out that it was unrealistic to expect Draco to be able to kill Dumbledore. However, Draco's help was invaluable in getting the DE's into the Castle so that Dumbledore could be killed. He, Draco, has performed valuable service to the Dark Lord, and that should be taken into consideration. A brief Crucio and Draco is put under Snape's watchful eye and tutelage where he can begin the conversion process. > 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or > "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? Why does > Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? > bboyminn: Snape is a spy, and he makes his living and more importantly stays alive by making sure no one knows what he is doing or thinking. So Snape's unfathomable and inscrutable look is a very well practiced defense mechanism. I think Snape return to the party because he senses that Draco has given up tonights efforts as a bad job. He is being to closely watch, has drawn far too much attention to himself to continue his work that night. So, Snape feels confident that he can leave Draco. It's also possible that Snape asked Filch to watch that specific hallway and allert him to any activity he found there. So, Filch's presence is also a deterent to Draco continuing his activities that particular night. > 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's > loyalties lie? Why do you think the chapter is titled "The > Unbreakable Vow" when the vow is barely mentioned? > bboyminn: As unbelievable as I find it, the minute Snape killed Dumbledore, I was sure that Snape was Dumbledore's man. Seems illogical I know. Snape's action here are two fold, first he has a SERIOUS interest in protecting Draco because of the Unbreakable Vow, and second, I think he is genuinely trying to get information of Draco's action so he can give it to Dumbledore. Again, I point out that they have suspicions of what Draco might be up to, but they have no confirmation and no proof. The need much more solid evidence in order to be able to take any actions against Draco, or to formulate a counter attack to what Draco is planning. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From katbofaye at aol.com Fri May 12 19:14:11 2006 From: katbofaye at aol.com (katssirius) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 19:14:11 -0000 Subject: Ginny ambivalence Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152156 Sister Magpie makes a valid point about the individual response to a character. I find Ginny less in need of a comeuppance than Hermione however as I reviewed the comments I think it bears pointing out that most females have very bad experiences with women like Ginny who have those characteristics described by Nick. Ron and Ginny both strayed way over the line as siblings or as friends. This was a hostile attack on Ginny's part. On the other hand the twins and Ron all are terrible women haters and Ginny just may have had it. katssirius From puduhepa98 at aol.com Fri May 12 21:54:59 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 17:54:59 EDT Subject: Snape v. Umbridge - was another Snape thread Message-ID: <409.1b3cf76.31965e33@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152157 > Nikkalmati: > Yes, he has had a lot of face time in the series. JKR can't drop him now. > He will play a key role somewhere. If he is DDM, Harry will have to have a > major change of heart during Book 7 as regards SS. I see this development as > one of the major events of the book. I hope it doesn't require SS's death to > accomplish it. > >Lupinlore >Only, IMO, if SNAPE first has a profound change of heart about HARRY, >including a profound and genuine apology for his abuse of Harry and >Neville. Anything else would, IMO, constitute a reprehensible >failure on JKR's part, amounting to an approval of the abuse of >children. I tend to agree that he does >have an important role to play, but JKR does sometimes have a way of >introducing characters, building them up, and then dropping them into >the background. Consider Lupin, for instance, who has been nothing >more than an umbrella stand for two books now, or Luna, or Neville, >or Tonks. Nikkalmati: Why am I not surprised? I followed the extensive threads on this topic last fall and the various opinions expressed there. I view the "abuse" by SS described by JKR in these books as essentially trivial, but then I went to Catholic schools . More to my point here, I want to consider Doris Umbridge as an abuser and overall evil character. I find her, if possible, easier to hate than LV himself, perhaps because her presence is more pervasive and immediate at least in OTP. As Sydney explained (if I recall correctly) LV is a Monster, not fully human. DU is, however, a type of petty bureaucrat who tyrannizes all around her. It is the pettiness of her cruelty that most enrages me. I can understand LV committing evil acts for the sake of ruling the WW, but her motives appear to be to satisfy her low craving for minor power over others, but there are no limits to what she will do within her tiny sphere. Worse, unlike LV, who to my mind does not pretend to be good, DU convinces herself that she is doing the right thing. See how she talks herself into Crucioing Harry. OTP pp. 746-47 U.S. ed. She not only doesn't teach, she prevents the students from learning and tries to prevent the other teachers from teaching. She doesn't want the students to play Quiddich. Not for nothing is she called the Grand Inquisitor. Harry calls her evil at least twice (OTP pp.271, 277). She is also the one who IMHO who abuses Harry, when she forces him to cut himself by magically writing on his own hand over and over and again and again.(OTP pp. 267-69, 270-75). When I read that part I felt sick to my stomach (and I don't remember ever having that reaction to a book before). The key factor that makes this abuse or, if you will, the most serious kind of abuse, is that it is done in secret. Whatever is done in public cannot be serious abuse, IMHO. Harry even feels so ashamed of being forced to injure himself that he will not tell his friends about it and when Ron finds out he won't take his advise to tell McGonagall or DD. . I know some listees have criticized HG for leading DU into the forest to meet the centaurs. Others have defended her for thinking of a solution to prevent an impending catastrophe. However one feels about HG, the real debacle occurred as a result of DU's own prejudice and insulting behavior. Whatever happened to her was a direct result of her own arrogant sense of superiority. She is, in fact, as prejudiced as any DE. She may even be connected to LV. Note when she touches Harry (OTP pp. 275, 277) Harry's scar hurt and his midriff felt funny. JKR may have her back in Book 7, and she is the one who needs to get her comeuppance on stage this time. Nikkalmati (who has been having trouble with the cable, but the man promises to come fix things on Monday!) ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Home is just a click away. Make Yahoo! your home page now. _Click Here!_ (http://us.click.yahoo.com/DHchtC/3FxNAA/yQLSAA/s4wxlB/TM) --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Wondering what to do this summer? Go to Patronus 2006 (http://www.patronus.dk/2006) or, if you're already registered for Lumos (http://www.hp2006.org), meet up with other HPfGU members there! 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_R EAD Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From siskiou at vcem.com Fri May 12 22:10:14 2006 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 15:10:14 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ginny ambivalence In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1236412234.20060512151014@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152158 Hi, Friday, May 12, 2006, 12:14:11 PM, katssirius wrote: > On the other hand the twins and Ron all are terrible > women haters and Ginny just may have had it. Women hater? I thought they were supposed to be older brothers, being worried about their little sister is growing up and wanting to protect her (in their own rude, big brotherly, bossy way). It's one of those things big brothers tend to do, and probably has more to do with them being boys and having a clue what other boys want to do with their sister! :D -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 22:23:02 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 22:23:02 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152159 > >>Nick: > Look at all this hate for Ginny! In my view, Ginny only takes out > her anger on people who deserve it. Betsy Hp: But it doesn't help anything when she does so. In fact, Ginny's actions only hurt those she cares for. So, while Ginny may believe (and others may agree) that she's only being cruel to those who deserve it, she's actually making life that much more difficult for those she claims to care for. Which is why I see her anger as a problem. > >>Nick: > Ron had no business telling her off and (stopping just short of) > calling her a slut. Betsy Hp: Ron had every right. He's her older brother, and she was putting herself into a position to earn those sort of nicknames. It was his duty as the elder sibling to call her on her behavior. (And the fight that came of it struck me as a very accurate depiction of those sort of sibling fights. No one looks good in the middle of such things.) > >>Nick: > Zacharias Smith had no business questioning her inclusion on the > team and calling it favoritism. > >>Ceridwen: > > Zacharias Smith has every right to question her inclusion. > > >>Ginger: > Are you saying the Zach had the "right" to his opinion (agreed > there) and to express that opinion in a public forum where he was, > theoretically, supposed to be commentating in an unbiased manner? > Ceridwen: > I went a bit off the deep end, I think. > Betsy Hp: I'm going to go with "off the deep end"!Ceridwen here. I *do* think Zacharias had a right to express his opinion while commenting. Especially in the *way* he expressed those opinions. IIRC, he merely suggested that it was suggestive that Harry had put so many close friends on his team. There's a reason McGonagall didn't call Zacharias on his commenting (unlike say, Lee Jordan). He was walking a fine line, but he was careful. Sure, it upset Harry, but thems the breaks. I *was* surprised that it upset Ginny so much, frankly. She proved Zacharias wrong from the get go, and he shut up pretty quickly into the game. That she held onto her anger so tightly that it outlasted a game in which she played well, and that she expressed it in such a destructive manner (the Slytherins *never* attacked Lee Jordan, and he was *very* biased at times) suggests that Ginny has some major issues going on. At least, IMO. (I've long thought that her strange attack against Zacharias on the train was because Ginny was embarrassed about having so little knowledge of what actually went down at the DoM. Harry and Neville were the only real eye-witnesses among the DA members. That might have bothered Ginny for some reason.) > >>Nick: > Also let's not forget the haughty disdainful Fleur of GOF > in deciding whether the chicken of Ginny's dislike came before the > egg of Fleur's attitude. Betsy Hp: What I remember from GoF was that Fleur has a little sister whom she loves very much. Which suggests to me that Fleur *does* know how to treat younger girls. So I suspect Fleur is doing a bit of tit for tat in her attitude towards Ginny. Though again, there's no definitive canon either way. However, Ginny is *wrong* about Fleur, as we see at the end of HBP. So this is yet another example of Ginny's anger not only being directed at someone who does *not* deserve it, but also hurting those she loves. Bill would have probably appreciated a little help in welcoming Fleur into the fold. (Though he seemed quietly amused at his families antics, so I'm sure he had an idea of what to expect. ) > >>Nick: > Additionally, we know for a fact that she sticks up for Luna. Betsy Hp: Actually, we don't. We know Ginny likes Luna. But where was Ginny's anger of Justice when Luna's stuff was stolen? That's what I meant about JKR not giving us a clear case of Ginny's "righteous" anger. Instead Ginny has just seemed, well, angry. > >>Nick: > She's an instrument of Justice; if you mess with Ginny, you reap > what you sow. Betsy Hp: Yeah, a whiny fifteen year old teeny-bopper. Hee! Sorry, couldn't resist. > >>Nick: > As for making fun of Ron, he's her BROTHER. Do any of you have > siblings? Betsy Hp: I do. And if either of my younger sisters had treated me as Ginny treated Ron there'd have been sooo much hell to pay. Ron is a better person than me, I guess. > >>Nick: > I hate to break it to everyone, but we're supposed to LIKE Ginny. > We're supposed to laugh at her jokes. We're supposed to approve > of her behavior. Betsy Hp: Why? > >>Nick: > I, for one, think she's hilarious, ballsy, vivacious, and probably > extremely hot. Harry deserves no less. > Do y'all have bad experiences with these types of people? Betsy Hp: Heh. I *was* that type of person for a while. Totally proud of my temper, etc. I was also going through a pretty dark time (on top of the usual "teenager" stuff) and fortunately worked my way through it. And once my head was on a little straighter I realized that my temper was actually a massive weakness and worked to change that too. IOWs, I grew up. So I have no doubt Ginny can do the same. I just hope she does. Because Harry deserves no less. Betsy Hp From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 22:47:47 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 22:47:47 -0000 Subject: Bad Love in HBP (was:Re: Calling Tonks Nymphadora...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152160 > >>Sherry: > > > But we are led to believe that love is the most important > > > thing, the power the "dark Lord knows not". I can't see > > > her love as a weakness. > >>houyhnhnm: > > I don't think Dumbledore (or Rowling) was talking about that > > kind of love. I don't mean that conjugal or erotic love cannot > > be a manifestation of the kind of love studied in the locked > > room. But not unrequited love, surely. I mean is it really > > love or is it just wanting something, something that the other > > person doesn't want to give. I think it is giving-love, not > > getting-love that is the power the "dark lord knows not". > >>Alla: > I think Dumbledore ( or Rowling) is talking about love in general. > > Positive love of course , but IMO erotic love is included, just as > love of the parents, love of the friends, sacrificial love, etc. > So, no, I don't see Tonks love as her weakness at all. > Misunderstandings which were in the way between her and Remus that > stopped them from expressing their love THAT what weakened her, > IMO. > Betsy Hp: I've lately come to the conclusion that HBP is all about "bad love". Which probably means that it's not really love at all. But that's what it gets called. I like how houyhnhnm phrased it, "getting-love", the sort of grasping, selfish, weakening "love" that I think Voldemort *does* understand and uses to his benefit. A love of personal glory, for example. Or a fear of love's destruction. I think HBP is filled with example of "bad love": The liberal use of love potions through out the books (and the destruction they leave in their paths) point to a "bad love" of a particularly grasping sort. Tonk's pining actually costs her her power, which *is* a weakness. And the pining can be defined as "bad love". It's a very self involved sort of feeling. Ron and Hermione's feelings for each other actually caused each other a great deal of pain. Because they both wanted the other to be the one to give. Another case of "bad love". And I really think Ginny's anger might be traced back to a "bad love" cause, whether it's Harry, or her jealosy regarding Bill, or even a reaction to her mother's fears. But if this is the case, I think book 7 will be all about "good love" or real, actual love. And I think we've already got hints about it. Dumbledore's sacrifice is an ultimate example of "giving love". Perhaps Ginny's willingness to let Harry go can be seen as an example of "giving love" too. We're all expecting a great deal of Lily in the next book, and she's already expressed the sort of ultimate "giving love" or "good love" when she sacrificed herself for Harry. I have a feeling that once we're done with book 7 it will be fairly obvious that the "love" expressed in HBP wasn't real love all. (Not that the couples set up in HBP won't be couples in book 7, but that they'll be healthier relationships, if that makes sense.) Betsy Hp From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri May 12 23:56:10 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 23:56:10 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152161 > > Betsy Hp: > I *was* surprised that it upset Ginny so much, frankly. She proved > Zacharias wrong from the get go, and he shut up pretty quickly into > the game. That she held onto her anger so tightly that it outlasted > a game in which she played well, and that she expressed it in such a > destructive manner (the Slytherins *never* attacked Lee Jordan, and > he was *very* biased at times) suggests that Ginny has some major > issues going on. At least, IMO. Pippin: Might I suggest that the only major issue Ginny has going on here is that she's not up for a group hug that includes Harry and Ron? OTOH, if she hangs back she'll look sulky and disloyal, so she flies into Zacharias instead. Pippin From enlil65 at gmail.com Sat May 13 00:26:44 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 19:26:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Counter an AK (was Re: Another look at the Prophecy) In-Reply-To: References: <1B5F222F-5409-49A3-B6CE-547E9CA7FB18@golden.net> Message-ID: <1789c2360605121726w198c3ca2s9f4069cd59eff58f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152162 On 5/12/06, Tonks wrote: > What if he [Harry] upped it a notch and > instead of trying to disarm his enemy he shot Love at him. (gave him > a box of love potion chocolates. ;-) Peggy W: Now there's an idea: give LV a Happy Potion! Unfortunately, that does away with free will; so IMO it's not a viable solution... -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 13 02:12:27 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 02:12:27 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152163 Carol wrote an excellent post and I'm having to reply in bits and pieces while seeing all sorts of other wonderful replies by the score! > Discussion Questions: > > 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with Lavender > and Hermione's reaction? Potioncat: I have my own Ron and Ginny. To me all the kissing and twining around one another has been the scariest part of the series! > > 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but > Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's plot > to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, potioning him? > And how responsible are the Twins, who made and sold the love potions, > for the uses to which the potions are put? Potioncat: In an earlier book there's a sentence, in the middle of something else happening, that says Hermione and Ginny are giggling with Molly about a love potion she'd made in her Hogwarts days. There was also a line somewhere about love potions being against the rules at Hogwarts, although I'm not sure if it was in the same book. Now we have the twins making love potions. Slughorn had a cauldron of the most powerful love potion in class. Not a vial, mind you, but a steaming cauldron, right in the middle of the students. What was the purpose of that? Love potions have been a part of fairy tales folklore for ages. There are many stories of young people going the "local witch" to get love potions or amulets. Just like divination, something always goes wrong. If Harry had taken the love potion, at the point that Ron did, would Romilda have been pleased with the result? He would be a moon-eyed puppy, bouncing around and annoying the daylights out of her. JKR has shown us the danger of love potions with Merope and Tom Sr. She's shown us the silly effects of the potions (later in HBP). But I don't think she intends the potions to be dark. They can certainly be misused! She's also shown us many different ways to respond to love and to express love. Look at the difference between Ginny and Tonks. Look at how similar Harry and Remus. From minerva_523 at yahoo.com Fri May 12 19:40:36 2006 From: minerva_523 at yahoo.com (minerva_523) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 19:40:36 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152164 Don L. wrote: "I would be very surprised if JKR wrote the Dumbledore confrontation with the Dursleys at the beginning of HBP in response to criticism... Conversely, I detest the idea that an author must conform her story, her world and her characters particularly Snape or DD, judged and criticized on narrow definitions of repentance and redemption." Cacaia: May I further add to that string of thought that, indeed, JKR does a superb job in making her characters as well rounded as possible. The heroes have flaws, strengths and weaknesses just such as the "villains" do. I love the fact that the characters are quite tangible, they could very much be the kid next door, or the bully who lives in a mansion up the hill. In other words, the "evil" characters in the book have their moments of light, just as the protagonist has his shadows to brood on as well. And the Wizarding World that Rowling has created is one so vast and expandable, so filled with balance, and oh so very loaded with meaning, that I must agree with Don L. that it, and its characters, should not be seen or judged so narrowly. That is my opinion, anyway. Cacaia From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 01:01:46 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 18:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060513010146.38229.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152165 > Betsy Hp: > I *was* surprised that it upset Ginny so much, frankly. She proved > Zacharias wrong from the get go, and he shut up pretty quickly into > the game. That she held onto her anger so tightly that it > outlasted a game in which she played well, and that she expressed > it in such a destructive manner (the Slytherins *never* attacked > Lee Jordan, and he was *very* biased at times) suggests that Ginny > has some major issues going on. At least, IMO. Joe: Yeah Lee was biased but he was also telling the truth. When he said the Slytherins were cheating it was because they were cheating. Smith was lying for the sole pupose being mean and snotty. The only issue Ginny has is that the world doesn't know what to do with people who stand up for themselves. This isn't for BetsyHP but more of a general question. Does anyone else think it is a bit odd that Ginny gets taken to task for responding to Smith being a jackass but people will bend of backwards to defend Draco almost killing two people while he attempts to kill a third. I know some people tend to indentify with the Slytherins but I must be missing something. Joe From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 04:52:14 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 04:52:14 -0000 Subject: Bad Love in HBP (was:Re: Calling Tonks Nymphadora...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152167 > Betsy Hp: > I've lately come to the conclusion that HBP is all about "bad > love". I think HBP is filled with example of "bad love": > > The liberal use of love potions through out the books (and the > destruction they leave in their paths) point to a "bad love" of a > particularly grasping sort. > > Tonk's pining actually costs her her power, which *is* a weakness. > And the pining can be defined as "bad love". It's a very self > involved sort of feeling. > > Ron and Hermione's feelings for each other actually caused each > other a great deal of pain. Because they both wanted the other to > be the one to give. Another case of "bad love". > > And I really think Ginny's anger might be traced back to a "bad > love" cause, whether it's Harry, or her jealosy regarding Bill, or > even a reaction to her mother's fears. Alla: I disagree partially. Sure we had seen plenty of bad love in HBP, but what we also saw IMO are conflicts between those who are truly in love and that is why I disagree that this is not love at all. Tonks "pining".... Well, it seems that she and Remus resolved their problems at the end, no? Since they are seen holding hands Ron and Hermione had problems. Sure, they did, but at the funeral Ron is hugging Hermione and it seems to me it will all go uphill, not downhill from there. Not sure what you mean about Ginny's anger. As I said I think it is "hormones". You think her love of Harry is bad cause? Or something else? And of course we have Bill and Fleur, who have IMO very powerful scene at the end, so I really cannot call their love "bad" and Molly and Arthur, who had been together through thin and thick, survived first Voldemort's rising, when Voldemort spreaded mistrust in wizarding community. They stayed together, they raised eight children. I really don't think that their love can be called bad. Betsy Hp: > But if this is the case, I think book 7 will be all about "good > love" or real, actual love. And I think we've already got hints > about it. Dumbledore's sacrifice is an ultimate example of "giving > love". Perhaps Ginny's willingness to let Harry go can be seen as > an example of "giving love" too. We're all expecting a great deal > of Lily in the next book, and she's already expressed the sort of > ultimate "giving love" or "good love" when she sacrificed herself > for Harry. Alla: But your examples are only sacrificial love. While I think it would be given a great deal of importance, I don't think that this is would be shown as the only kind of good love and relationships will thrive IMO. Betsy Hp: > I have a feeling that once we're done with book 7 it will be fairly > obvious that the "love" expressed in HBP wasn't real love all. (Not > that the couples set up in HBP won't be couples in book 7, but that > they'll be healthier relationships, if that makes sense.) Alla: I guess I am confused now, because if you are not saying that all couples of HBP would disappear, but their relationships will emerge as healthier then I agree with you. BUT then why do you say that HBP love was not a real love at all? Isn't it better defined as first stage of real love, full of conflicts and misunderstandings, but the one who will survive eventually? JMO, Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 04:45:13 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 04:45:13 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <20060513010146.38229.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152168 > Joe: > This isn't for BetsyHP but more of a general question. Does anyone > else think it is a bit odd that Ginny gets taken to task for > responding to Smith being a jackass but people will bend of backwards > to defend Draco almost killing two people while he attempts to kill > a third. Alla: Hehe. Well, I think two issues are not really comparable. I DO like Ginny a lot and I do think that Smith deserved what he got, I also think that Draco willingly participated in assasination of the Headmaster and willingly almost murdered two students and only miracle,whose name is JKR saved them. For that and all that little shmuck did in the previous books Draco will have to work VERY hard to convince me that he has any kind of decency left in him in book 7. BUT... what do his deeds have to do with Ginny? I mean, Draco is a criminal, Ginny did not do anything criminal in the books I am reading at least :) But why cannot Ginny be criticised independently of Draco's crimes? You know, without comparing the two? Personally, I DO think that Ginny was angry in HBP, but I tend to think that those are teenage hormones, nothing more than that. I also think that it was a nice touch if Ginny was just as angry as Harry was in OOP as someone commented and working through that. Betsy Hp: > I *was* surprised that it upset Ginny so much, frankly. She proved > Zacharias wrong from the get go, and he shut up pretty quickly into > the game. That she held onto her anger so tightly that it outlasted > a game in which she played well, and that she expressed it in such a > destructive manner (the Slytherins *never* attacked Lee Jordan, and > he was *very* biased at times) suggests that Ginny has some major > issues going on. At least, IMO. Alla: I so was not surprised that it upset Ginny so much. Unfair accusations get to me A LOT and at my previous job I never kept silent when I was accused of something that was not my fault. Hehe. It only happened couple of times and basically because of misunderstanding, but I was annoyed because I did my job well and the implication was that I made a mistake. So, no, totally not surprised about Ginny. Besides, very short period of time passed after Smith's insults ( I perceive them as insult) - only one game. If Ginny would hold on to her anger , I don't know for a month, even for a week after the game, then I would say the she has some issues, but to be angry for what half an hour or an hour after you heard the insult? I really don't think that this is unusual. IMO of course. IMO, Alla From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 13 12:38:18 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 12:38:18 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152169 Carol wrote: > 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on Everlasting > Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's aspersions and > Madam Pince's grasping hands. Is he just using the Prince's notes to > get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the > Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? How > might this new interest in Potions, if it lasts, play out in Book 7? Potioncat: I didn't get the idea he was interested in the potions, as much as he liked having the improved method of making them. He was much more interested in the spells. But, if he did grasp some subtlety in potion making, it might help him in book 7. Oh, wouldn't that be a good one, if he saved Snape's life with a potion? > > 5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in ?? love? Is Harry right? Potioncat: That came out of the blue! Have we ever seen them together? At this point, I thought he was making a joke because they are so similar. Of course, later they show up side by side at the funeral. > > 6) Do you agree with Harry that Hermione got what she deserved when Cormac ambushed her under the mistletoe? Why or why not? Potioncat: Oh, that opinion is an older story than the fairy tales, "the girl got what she deserved." Of course, if Cormac thought she might like him, and if it was a simple kiss under the mistletoe, he might be at a total loss about her reaction. It might be interesting to hear Cormac's side of the story. You know social skills aren't one of his strengths. > > 7 And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along > with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star pupil, > Severus Snape? Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire > Sanguini as a party guest? Potioncat: Why indeed! If it weren't for her being there, I'd be certain that Snape was in the Slug Club as a student. We don't see any other teacher there, but that doesn't mean they aren't there. Trelawney is connected to a famous seer, and may have been in the Slug Club for that reason when she was a student. The only other party we saw her attend was the Christmas dinner in PoA. She seemed to be after Lupin at that time. I wonder if she came now in order to meet someone who might be helpful to her. We don't take her seriously, nor does McGonagall or DD, but Slughorn could. I loved Sanguini! Yes, I caught on the name. Maybe JKR felt she owed us a vampire after all the allusions to them in the series. His handler was more interesting, though. He's a collector just like Slughorn. There he stood with his pet vampire and he was trying to add Harry to his list. I wonder if Snape was surprised that Harry turned down the offer for the biography. From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 14:11:23 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 07:11:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060513141123.37968.qmail@web61321.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152170 Alla: Hehe. Well, I think two issues are not really comparable. I DO like Ginny a lot and I do think that Smith deserved what he got, I also think that Draco willingly participated in assasination of the Headmaster and willingly almost murdered two students and only miracle,whose name is JKR saved them. For that and all that little shmuck did in the previous books Draco will have to work VERY hard to convince me that he has any kind of decency left in him in book 7. BUT... what do his deeds have to do with Ginny? I mean, Draco is a criminal, Ginny did not do anything criminal in the books I am reading at least :) But why cannot Ginny be criticised independently of Draco's crimes? You know, without comparing the two? Personally, I DO think that Ginny was angry in HBP, but I tend to think that those are teenage hormones, nothing more than that. I also think that it was a nice touch if Ginny was just as angry as Harry was in OOP as someone commented and working through that. Joe: Sorry maybe I wasn't clear enough. What I meant is that it seems like for a great many posters there is a huge double standard and used Ginny and Draco as examples. Ginny on one hand does something fairly understandable in response to direct provocation and there are people on this list and off of it who believe she was acting wildly and out of control. Yeah it is fine to criticise Ginny when she responds badly to something ie both she and Ron going way over the line when he catches her snogging Dean but the thing with Smith. The guy asked for it, in public no less. The very same people will make excuse after excuse for Draco's murderous actions. I guess what I am asking is why many people will make excuse after excuse for Draco and to a lesser degree Snape and then hammer Ginny, Ron, Hagrid etc? I guess it is more of a why does character matter for some of the HP characters and not the others? Do we just always expect the "good guys" to be perfect? Are the bad guys "always" just tortured souls who would have been great people if their dad had hugged them more? If so why no love for Bellatrix or Voldemort? Joe From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 13 15:21:13 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 11:21:13 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny Haters References: <20060513010146.38229.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003f01c676a0$dfa2a120$b880400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152171 > Joe: The only issue Ginny has is that the world doesn't know what to do with people who stand up for themselves. > This isn't for BetsyHP but more of a general question. Does anyone > else think it is a bit odd that Ginny gets taken to task for > responding to Smith being a jackass but people will bend of backwards > to defend Draco almost killing two people while he attempts to kill > a third. Magpie: Not really. The acts of these characters are apples and oranges, and when people talk about them they're talking about them in context of the story. Draco's story is about someone who romanticized and lived a bad life and now is suffering the consequences. The story is about if he can learn he was wrong, admit it, and become a better person or will be destroyed. That's very different than Ginny's individual scenes. Perhaps the same people who like Draco's story would be equally annoyed with him if he were presented the way Ginny is. As if is it's made clear he's anything but cool, even if he, too, occasionally is speaking the truth. It's like the way people can watch The Sopranos with Tony as the hero and yet root for the mob boss to get put away on Law & Order. It's the story that creates a different standard: Draco's is a story about a kid who might destroy himself and might not, so there's some reason to root for the latter. Ginny's story is far less about actions and consequences in that her own actions don't really have any. So you either enjoy them vicariously or you don't. Now, if we're talking about someone who actually wants to claim that Draco is only a victim and just standing up for himself in canon, then that's probably just a case of the way fandom often acts, where they have a favorite character and so always twist everything to make that character the victim. But that's annoying whether it's being done for a "bad" character or a good character (it's just sometimes more obvious when it's a bad character). The thing is, the world does know what to do with people like Ginny--they stand up for themselves right back. They decide Ginny's being a jackass and some of them would decide to hand her brand of righteous justice right back at her. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 15:29:13 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:29:13 -0000 Subject: Bad guys vs Good guys WAS: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <20060513141123.37968.qmail@web61321.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152172 > Joe: > I guess what I am asking is why many people will make excuse after excuse for Draco and to a lesser degree Snape and then hammer Ginny, Ron, Hagrid etc? I guess it is more of a why does character matter for some of the HP characters and not the others? > > Do we just always expect the "good guys" to be perfect? > > Are the bad guys "always" just tortured souls who would have been great people if their dad had hugged them more? If so why no love for Bellatrix or Voldemort? Alla: Oooo, totally my answer would be YES. BUT this is just general observation and of course it all comes down to the characters we like or not IMO. Take Ron for example. Here we have nice, brave, loyal, sweet, decent guy. I was SHOCKED, literally shocked at how many people in fandom hate him. And I am still trying to decipher what multitude of sins Ron committed to deserve such hatred. I mean, SURE he makes mistakes as any kid will do, but my puzzlement is how fandom ( I AM generalising, I know that, I know that not everybody does that, but again I have seen it enough times to conclude that I do have a right to make such generalisation) turns Ron into Traitor!Ron, into Coward!Ron, etc. I mean, this is the guy who stood in front of Harry with broken leg and was ready to die for him. This is the guy who after the fight they had in GoF came back running the moment he realised that Harry is being hunted. Traitor! Ron IMO does not exist anywhere in the canon. And here we have Draco, who is really poor misunderstood soul underneath all that "pureblooded" bigotry and murder attempts. :) Personally and again just my observation which is not in any way objective, the love for Draco and Snape has a lot to do with hurt/comfort. Not everything, but a lot IMO I am guilty of that myself of course. Love tortured characters who are looking for redemption and despite the fact that I always hated Snape's behaviour towards Harry and Neville, prior to HBP I hoped that Snape will find some kind of peace for himself, while realising that he was so wrong about Harry. Of course HBP effectively cured me of that. Now the only wish I have for Snape is to see him suffer, A LOT. :) He committed one bad deed too many for me to feel any kind of "empathy" with him. I love tortured characters, but not pure villains and here I think lies the answer towards why there is no love for Voldemort and Bella. Because there is no possible sign anywhere in canon that they are tortured souls , although in fanfiction I had seen some stories with Voldemort as tortured soul too ( made me very ill ;)) So, yeah, those are just my speculations in answer to your question. Alla From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 13 15:30:38 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:30:38 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <20060513141123.37968.qmail@web61321.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152173 -> Alla: > > I mean, Draco is a criminal, Ginny did not do anything criminal in > the books I am reading at least :) > > > Joe: > Sorry maybe I wasn't clear enough. What I meant is that it seems like for a great many posters there is a huge double standard and used Ginny and Draco as examples. > > Ginny on one hand does something fairly understandable in response to direct provocation and there are people on this list and off of it who believe she was acting wildly and out of control. Yeah it is fine to criticise Ginny when she responds badly to something ie both she and Ron going way over the line when he catches her snogging Dean but the thing with Smith. The guy asked for it, in public no less. > > The very same people will make excuse after excuse for Draco's murderous actions. Pippin: What about all the people who seem to have completely forgotten about Ginny's murderous actions in Book Two? Should she get a pass because she was being controlled by Lord Voldemort, but not Draco? And before you tell me that Draco got involved of his own free will, let me remind you that Ginny stole the Diary back from Harry's room when she already knew that it was making her do things. She lied to her parents and to Dumbledore himself and said she didn't know the Diary was dangerous. But she did. She's not as perfect as some people would like to think. I'm afraid Ginny gets a pass from some people because Harry likes her, and others are hard on her for the same reason. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 15:43:14 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:43:14 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152174 > Pippin: > What about all the people who seem to have completely forgotten about > Ginny's murderous actions in Book Two? Should she get a pass because > she was being controlled by Lord Voldemort, but not Draco? Alla: Yes, she definitely should IMO, because as Dumbledore said stronger witches and wizards had been under Voldemort control ( paraphrasing here) Pippin: > And before you tell me that Draco got involved of his own free will, let > me remind you that Ginny stole the Diary back from Harry's room when > she already knew that it was making her do things. She lied to her > parents and to Dumbledore himself and said she didn't know the > Diary was dangerous. But she did. She's not as perfect as some people > would like to think. Alla: He was BRAGGING about his mission on the train, Pippin. Bragging. he was happy to participate in the assasination. Before he knew that he would be blackmailed or anything like that. I don't think that Ginny stealing the Diary and yes, I remember it well could be contributed as Ginny's own action. It is not like Voldemort stopped controlling her mind to let her steal the diary, he just eased the grip a little bit. Sure, she realised that Diary was making her do bad things, but was that Ginny or Voldemort controlled Ginny who stole it back? I think Voldemort was still in her and she cannot be hold responsible for anything she did after he entered her brain. To me it is as simple as that. No, she is not perfect but IMO Ginny has to work REALLY hard to be even close to being as bad as Draco. Pippin: > I'm afraid Ginny gets a pass from some people because Harry likes her, > and others are hard on her for the same reason. Alla: Um, not from me. I could not stand Cho and Harry seemed to really like her. JMO, Alla From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 14:51:10 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 14:51:10 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <20060513141123.37968.qmail@web61321.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152175 Joe: Sorry maybe I wasn't clear enough. What I meant is that it seems like for a great many posters there is a huge double standard and used Ginny and Draco as examples. Nick: Well, what would Dumbledore say? I think the double standard comes from the fact that Draco did what he did under threat of death from Lord Voldemort. This makes him much like Regulus, no? It won't take much to redeem Draco in my eyes. Everything significantly "evil" that he's done (and not merely selfish or bratty) is because of Voldemort. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 13 17:18:40 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 17:18:40 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152176 > > Alla: > > He was BRAGGING about his mission on the train, Pippin. Bragging. he > was happy to participate in the assasination. Before he knew that > he would be blackmailed or anything like that. > > I don't think that Ginny stealing the Diary and yes, I remember it > well could be contributed as Ginny's own action. It is not like > Voldemort stopped controlling her mind to let her steal the diary, > he just eased the grip a little bit. > > Sure, she realised that Diary was making her do bad things, but was > that Ginny or Voldemort controlled Ginny who stole it back? > > I think Voldemort was still in her and she cannot be hold > responsible for anything she did after he entered her brain. To me > it is as simple as that. Pippin: No. Voldemort could not leave the pages of the diary, not until it had almost consumed Ginny at the end. There was no way he could leave part of himself in Ginny and part in the diary. As we know, souls cannot be split except through an act of murder, and the diary didn't kill anyone. When she threw the Diary away, she was free, except for her fear that what she had done would be found out and she would have to leave Hogwarts. In a way she's more culpable than Draco, because she knew that what she was doing was wrong, and yet she did it anyway. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 17:31:31 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 17:31:31 -0000 Subject: Draco vs. Regulus, or vice versa (Was: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152177 Nick wrote: > I think the double standard comes from the fact that Draco did what he did under threat of death from Lord Voldemort. This makes him much like Regulus, no? > Carol responds: While I'm hoping for a redeemed Draco somehow brought over to the good side with DDM!Snape's help, I agree with Alla (surprise!) that Draco joined the Dark side of his own free will (in part, IMO, as an act of vengeance against the people who brought about his father's arrest, including Harry), and, as Alla notes, he was bragging on the train about his mission for the Dark Lord, which included the murder of Albus Dumbledore. Now granted, Draco didn't realize at that time that he was in above his head, that he would be endangering innocent people (other than Dumbledore), that LV would threaten to kill him and his family, but nevertheless, he was plotting from the beginning to bring Death Eaters into Hogwarts and to murder Dumbledore. Those plans are not exactly innocent, nor was he aware at that time of any danger to himself or his family. The only detectable emotion in the train compartment scene, aside from his jealousy of Slughorn's attentions to Blaise Zabini, is, IMO, self-importance. (Note that he is already neglecting his Prefect duties as beneath him.) That, IMO, is different from Regulus, who joined the DEs thinking they were some sort of crusaders for pureblood rights (which is why his parents thought he was "a right little hero" for joining up)--not exactly a noble motive, but very different from Draco's awareness that the DEs engage in Muggle-baiting for sport and many of them routinely use Unforgiveable Curses. (Surely Draco knows about Aunt Bellatrix and the Longbottoms, for example.) But when Regulus, in contrast to Draco, was asked to do something overtly cruel or evil (perhaps "a spot of Muggle torture," though we don't know what it was), he apparently refused. I'm assuming, based on LV's usual treatment of his DEs, that he was Crucio'd for his disobedience the first time, but instead of being brought into line by his punishment, he became determined to help destroy Voldemort by stealing his Horcrux (the only one Regulus knew about), and destroying it if he could (IMO, he failed, as the locket is still sealed shut), knowing that he would soon be dead--not for the theft of the Horcrux, which LV wouldn't know about, but for further refusal to follow LV's orders. (I have my own theories as to how Regulus knew about the Horcrux, discussed months ago in a different thread. And, of course, I'm taking for granted that Regulus is RAB.) So, yes, both Draco and Regulus discovered that being a DE wasn't what they thought it would be, but their reasons for joining were different, and Draco did not accept his assignment under threat of death. Draco *volunteered* the information about the linked Vanishing Cabinets as a way for the Death Eaters to enter Hogwarts, which inevitably led to his assignment of repairing the broken cabinet. So even if he hadn't been ordered to murder Dumbledore as well, he would still have been voluntarily doing something very dangerous that could well have led to the deaths of his fellow students. And he was actually proud, not only of the assignment to repair the cabinet but of the further mission to kill Dumbledore. Regulus, in contrast, not only refused to obey Voldemort, for which he was ultimately killed, but actively attempted to bring about the Dark Lord's destruction, as his signed note plainly states. Regulus, despite his pureblood ideology, really is "a right little hero," or perhaps a martyr, who gave his life rather than do the Dark Lord's bidding. Draco is just a boy with delusions of glory and grandeur who learned the hard way that the Dark Lord is a cruel taskmaster with no more love for his servants than for his enemies. There is hope, IMO, for Draco's redemption, thanks to Dumbledore's mercy and Snape's determination to prevent Draco from either killing or being killed (the determination that led to his own entrapment in the Unbreakable Vow), and I do feel some pity for Draco once he realizes that his stupidity and pride have placed him and his family in grave danger. But I doubt very much that Draco will sacrifice himself as Regulus did in the hope of aiding the Dark Lord's destruction, nor do I regard his actions in HBP as those of a (mostly) innocent victim forced to do the Dark Lord's bidding against his will (like Ginny in CoS). Carol, seeing Draco, Regulus, and Young!Snape as variations on the theme of a young person whose delusions about the Death Eaters are painfully shattered, in marked contrast to Barty Jr. From sherriola at earthlink.net Sat May 13 17:33:03 2006 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 10:33:03 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152178 Pippin: In a way she's more culpable than Draco, because she knew that what she was doing was wrong, and yet she did it anyway. Pippin Sherry now: I see a big difference between Ginny and Draco, and yes, I do see redemption ahead for Draco, and I do not like him, and I do like Ginny. However, The big difference is age. Ginny was 11. Draco is either 16 or 17. If he's 17, he's of age in the WW, presumably an adult with the choices and consequences that involves. Neither has he been possessed by Voldemort. Ginny was a child, and that, to me, gives her a pass. It's impossible to compare the two situations based on the fact of their ages at the time. Ginny got into something dangerous without knowing what she was doing. Draco knew what he was doing and made his choices. Once his family was threatened, I can understand him to some extent, because why should he feel he can trust any other adults to help him? In that way, he still shows that he has growing up to do. Yet, still, he is older than Ginny was in COS and I cannot see how she could be blamed, but Draco cannot. Sherry From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 13 18:50:05 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 14:50:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco vs. Regulus, or vice versa (Was: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) References: Message-ID: <00be01c676be$0d1ce8a0$b880400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152179 Carol responds: That, IMO, is different from Regulus, who joined the DEs thinking they were some sort of crusaders for pureblood rights (which is why his parents thought he was "a right little hero" for joining up)--not exactly a noble motive, but very different from Draco's awareness that the DEs engage in Muggle-baiting for sport and many of them routinely use Unforgiveable Curses. (Surely Draco knows about Aunt Bellatrix and the Longbottoms, for example.) But when Regulus, in contrast to Draco, was asked to do something overtly cruel or evil (perhaps "a spot of Muggle torture," though we don't know what it was), he apparently refused. I'm assuming, based on LV's usual treatment of his DEs, that he was Crucio'd for his disobedience the first time, but instead of being brought into line by his punishment, he became determined to help destroy Voldemort by stealing his Horcrux (the only one Regulus knew about), and destroying it if he could (IMO, he failed, as the locket is still sealed shut), knowing that he would soon be dead--not for the theft of the Horcrux, which LV wouldn't know about, but for further refusal to follow LV's orders. (I have my own theories as to how Regulus knew about the Horcrux, discussed months ago in a different thread. And, of course, I'm taking for granted that Regulus is RAB.) Magpie: We have no canon at all to suggest Regulus was so different from Draco at all in terms of thinking the DEs would be above torturing Muggles, or that Draco is so different than Regulus in not considering the DEs a noble cause for Pureblood rights. Canon suggests Draco knows nothing about the Longbottoms, and from what we see of Regulus' house I don't think we can assume he would be any more naive about Voldemort's use of Unforgivables than Draco. He joined up during Voldemort's reign of terror so would be seeing this all around him. Carol: Draco *volunteered* the information about the linked Vanishing Cabinets as a way for the Death Eaters to enter Hogwarts, which inevitably led to his assignment of repairing the broken cabinet. So even if he hadn't been ordered to murder Dumbledore as well, he would still have been voluntarily doing something very dangerous that could well have led to the deaths of his fellow students. Magpie: It never occured to me reading the book that Draco was supposed to have come up with the cabinet plot and brought it to Voldemort, only then to be given the extra assignment of killing DD. To me canon and the way all the adults talk about what's going on suggests something more straightforward: Voldemort gave an assignment to Draco to kill Dumbledore, which Draco eagerly accepted as an honor and a way of avenging his family and proving himself. His plan for doing this was the Vanishing Cabinet. Bringing DEs into the school alone is a serious crime, but they themselves are just there to make sure DD gets killed. We don't know how Regulus joined up except for Sirius' description of his being a right little hero--though Sirius also believes that Regulus died without ever doing anything worthwhile, so it's not not necessarily accurate. All we know is that apparently Regulus volunteered to be a DE. Carol: And he was actually proud, not only of the assignment to repair the cabinet but of the further mission to kill Dumbledore. Regulus, in contrast, not only refused to obey Voldemort, for which he was ultimately killed, but actively attempted to bring about the Dark Lord's destruction, as his signed note plainly states. Magpie: We don't know what Regulus was ordered to do and refused. For all we know he'd killed other people and then was assigned to kill Sirius and balked at that. All we know, imo, was that Regulus ultimately decided that Voldemort was wrong and took action to bring him down--something Draco has never done. But we don't know that early Regulus before he made that decision, was so different from Draco. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 20:38:00 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 20:38:00 -0000 Subject: Bad Love in HBP (was:Re: Calling Tonks Nymphadora...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152180 > >>Betsy Hp: > > I've lately come to the conclusion that HBP is all about "bad > > love". > > > >>Alla: > I disagree partially. Sure we had seen plenty of bad love in HBP, > but what we also saw IMO are conflicts between those who are truly > in love and that is why I disagree that this is not love at all. > Betsy Hp: Oh, I totally agree. The bad love isn't really love at all. I'm probably not being very clear. (This is a newish idea, so I'm having problems expressing it. ) What HBP gives us is the "dark" side of love, if you will. Merope's love for Tom gets twisted until she's willing to totally eclipse his will with hers. I think she probably started out with very innocent feelings of love, but in her desperation and pain, that love became something dark. Tonks loves Remus, yes, but in the course of that love she gets so wrapped up in his refusal she looses her powers and is weakened. Just as Ron and Hermione do love each other, but for some reason (miscommunication, what have you) their love gets twisted so that they're deliberatly looking for ways to hurt each other. You could even say that the sibling love between Ron and Ginny gets twisted when Ginny uses the closeness between two siblings to humiliate and hurt Ron. I'm not saying *every* example of love in HBP was one of bad love. Or that all of the various loves expressed are, at their heart, bad. For example, I do think Ron and Hermione will work their differences out and start expressing a good love that strengthens them both, rather than tearing each other down. > >>Betsy Hp: > > But if this is the case, I think book 7 will be all about "good > > love" or real, actual love. > > > Alla: > But your examples are only sacrificial love. While I think it would > be given a great deal of importance, I don't think that this is > would be shown as the only kind of good love and relationships will > thrive IMO. Betsy Hp: I agree that good relationships will thrive. But I also think good relationships have sacrificial love at their core. As an example, Hermione will let go and let Ron be Ron. Their relationship will improve, because Hermione sacrifices her instinct to control those around her. > >>Betsy Hp: > > I have a feeling that once we're done with book 7 it will be > > fairly obvious that the "love" expressed in HBP wasn't real love > > all. (Not that the couples set up in HBP won't be couples in > > book 7, but that they'll be healthier relationships, if that > > makes sense.) > >>Alla: > I guess I am confused now, because if you are not saying that all > couples of HBP would disappear, but their relationships will emerge > as healthier then I agree with you. BUT then why do you say that > HBP love was not a real love at all? Isn't it better defined as > first stage of real love, full of conflicts and misunderstandings, > but the one who will survive eventually? Betsy Hp: I guess because Ron mocking Hermione in class so that she leaves in tears doesn't strike me as love. It's not a loving act, IMO. *We* know that he's only doing it because underneath it all he cares deeply for Hermione and is hurt by her actions towards him. But it's not love. It can be a necessary step on the road to love, but it isn't the real thing. And this particular book if filled with those two hurting each other. Compared with OotP where Hermione and Ron made a pretty good team. Once Ron and Hermione finally get over their issues I'm betting that they'll express a strong and healthy love, as we gets hints of at Dumbledore's funeral. But the games they were playing throughout HBP, were not real or good expressions of love. Surprisingly enough, I think Ginny and Harry got into the good sort of love a bit early. (I'm away from my books right now, so I can't confirm this.) IIRC, once they finally get together it's pretty peaceful for both of them. However, Harry had to fight against some instincts towards bad love when he first realized that Ginny was the "one". He grabbled with the idea of throwing Dean off the team, for example. Which, while inspired by his love for Ginny would have been a bad way of expressing it. HBP does end with some hints of good love in the air. (Especially at Dumbledore's funeral.) But I think the 7th book will be filled with examples. Just as HBP practically floated in love potions (bad love). It's a theory, anyway. Betsy Hp From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 16:34:36 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 16:34:36 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152182 Don L. wrote: > I for one do not think JKR had bowed or should bow to criticism > for her fictional characters' faults any more than she should > stop writing the series because of criticism from some parts > because of the misplaced fear that young readers may become > Satan's followers or read more redeeming books less. Did she bow to criticism? Who knows? Maybe some day she will tell us. It seemed to me highly suggestive that so many parts of HBP responded -- or corresponded, if you will, -- to so many vociferous arguments and criticisms coming from the fandom. DD at the Dursleys dealt to an extent with the whole "DD approves of child abuse" business. Hagrid's brief speech about Hogwarts and its dangers dealt with that discussion. Etc. But this isn't a bad thing. The business of an author is not to say, "Here is my creation, all bow down and #@$% you if you don't like it or understand it." The business of an author is to say "Here is my vision, what do you think?" Now, often when you present people with your vision they are going to say, "I don't see it." Sometimes you shrug because that part of your vision isn't that important from your perspective. Sometimes, however, what they don't see is critical to your vision as a whole. And in that case it behooves a smart author to explain herself. And therein is where DD comes in. JKR has an enormous amount invested in getting across a certain vision of DD. Apart from Harry, he is the most crucial character in the series. How you respond to DD in large part determines your approach to the entire Potter saga. It may be that Snape's character can remain an enigma, as far as JKR is concerned. I don't think the same is true of DD. I think she VERY much wants readers to see DD a certain way, and if they don't then something crucial isn't getting across. In the wake of OOTP it was obvious that many people didn't see DD the way JKR wanted. She then did what an intelligent sales person does when their pitch isn't working, she changed her tactics. > Conversely, I detest the idea that an author must conform her > story, her world and her characters particularly Snape or DD, > judged and criticized on narrow definitions of repentance and > redemption. Well, that is what determines what you will do with the books, isn't it? Put them in a glass case? Throw them in the wood chipper? IMO, the detestable thing would be NOT to deal with these issues. Sorry, but any work that approves of the abuse of children is, IMO, reprehensible, and good for nothing but mulch. Lupinlore From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 19:40:50 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:40:50 -0000 Subject: Regulus (Re: Draco vs. Regulus, or vice versa) In-Reply-To: <00be01c676be$0d1ce8a0$b880400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152183 > Magpie: > We don't know what Regulus was ordered to do and refused. For all > we know he'd killed other people and then was assigned to kill > Sirius and balked at that. All we know, imo, was that Regulus > ultimately decided that Voldemort was wrong and took action to > bring him down-- Nick: I don't have the Black family tree on hand, but is it possible that Regulus was "in on" the plot to frame Sirius for the Potters' deaths, backed out, and was subsequently killed because Voldemort was afraid he'd blow the plan? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 21:30:20 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:30:20 -0000 Subject: Draco vs. Regulus, or vice versa (Was: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: <00be01c676be$0d1ce8a0$b880400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152184 Carol earlier:> > That, IMO, is different from Regulus, who joined the DEs thinking they were some sort of crusaders for pureblood rights (which is why his parents thought he was "a right little hero" for joining up)--not exactly a noble motive, but very different from Draco's awareness that the DEs engage in Muggle-baiting for sport and many of them routinely use Unforgiveable Curses. (Surely Draco knows about Aunt Bellatrix and the Longbottoms, for example.) But when Regulus, in contrast to Draco, was asked to do something overtly cruel or evil (perhaps "a spot of Muggle torture," though we don't know what it was), he apparently refused. I'm assuming, based on LV's usual treatment of his DEs, that he was Crucio'd for his disobedience the first time, but instead of being brought into line by his punishment, he became determined to help destroy Voldemort by stealing his Horcrux (the only one Regulus knew about), and destroying it if he could (IMO, he failed, as the locket is still sealed shut), knowing that he would soon be dead--not for the theft of the Horcrux, which LV wouldn't know about, but for further refusal to follow LV's orders. > Magpie responded: > We have no canon at all to suggest Regulus was so different from Draco at all in terms of thinking the DEs would be above torturing Muggles, or that Draco is so different than Regulus in not considering the DEs a noble cause for Pureblood rights. Canon suggests Draco knows nothing about the Longbottoms, and from what we see of Regulus' house I don't think we can assume he would be any more naive about Voldemort's use of Unforgivables than Draco. He joined up during Voldemort's reign of terror so would be seeing this all around him. > We don't know how Regulus joined up except for Sirius' description of his being a right little hero--though Sirius also believes that Regulus died without ever doing anything worthwhile, so it's not not necessarily accurate. All we know is that apparently Regulus volunteered to be a DE. Carol earlier: > And he was actually proud, not only of the assignment to repair the cabinet but of the further mission to kill Dumbledore. Regulus, in contrast, not only refused to obey Voldemort, for which he was ultimately killed, but actively attempted to bring about the Dark Lord's destruction, as his signed note plainly states. > Magpie responded: > We don't know what Regulus was ordered to do and refused. For all we know he'd killed other people and then was assigned to kill Sirius and balked at that. All we know, imo, was that Regulus ultimately decided that Voldemort was wrong and took action to bring him down--something Draco has never done. > But we don't know that early Regulus before he made that decision, was so different from Draco. Carol again: Granted, JKR herself makes a comparison between Regulus and Draco: "JKR: That doesn't necessarily show that Voldemort killed him, personally, but Sirius himself suspected that Regulus got in a little too deep. Like Draco. He was attracted to it, but the reality of what it meant was way too much to handle." She also reminds us that Regulus wasn't considered important enough to be murdered personally by Voldemort, http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-2.htm almost certainly meaning that Regulus disobeyed an order to do something evil and that Voldemort knew nothing about the missing Horcrux. Let's look at the canon on Regulus, which is admittedly limited. The first mention of him comes in OoP, "The Noble and Ancient House of Black." Sirius Black says: "No, he was murdered by Voldemort. Or on Voldemort's order, more likely, I doubt Regulus was ever important enough to be killed by Voldemort in person. From what I found out after he died, he got in so far, then panicked about what he was being asked to do and tried to back out. Well, you don't just hand in your resignation to Voldemort. It's a lifetime of service or death" (OoP Am. ed. 112). So, yes, we can definitely say that Regulus refused to do something that he found repugnant, and a boy (he was a teenager) who would murder a Muggle or a stranger would not balk at killing his blood traitor brother who also happened to be a member of the Order of the Phoenix. Also, as DD tells Draco, "Killing is not nearly as easy as the innocent believe" (HBP A. ed. 586). Regulus, who "panicked and backed out," must have found murder as difficult as Draco did. I seriously doubt that he ever committed it. Had he done so, he would probably have become fanatically loyal to LV as Barty Jr. did rather than stealing and intending to destroy a Horcrux. Clearly, from both Sirius's words and JKR's, Regulus did not know what he was getting into. Draco, however, had a Death Eater for a father, was well acquainted with other DE kids, and had a DE aunt who was arrested for Crucioing the Longbottoms. If he didn't know that before the escape of the DEs from Azkaban, he certainly knew it after the article on the escape was published in the Daily Prophet. And Aunt Bellatrix would have made no secret of her deeds in the service of the Dark Lord, including the murder of her own cousin. (Regulus, too, was her cousin, but he died before these events occurred, and she was considerably older than he was. I doubt that he was in her confidence regarding the usual activities of Death Eaters.) More canon for Regulus not knowing what he was in for: "'Were--were your parents Death Eaters as well?' [asks Harry]. "'No, no, but believe me, they thought Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having pure-bloods in charge. They weren't alone, either, there were quite a few people *before Voldemort showed his true colors,* who thought he had the right idea about things. . . . *They got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get power,* though. But I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right little hero for joining up at first" (OoP 112, ellipsis in original). Note "at first and "before Voldemort showed his true colors." Once it became clear that Voldemort intended to make war, torturing and murdering nonsupporters and generally creating a reign of terror, they no longer thought he had the right idea. They "got cold feet." Nor did they ever become Death Eaters. But for Regulus, who learned too late that Voldemort's cause was really his own power (and immortality), to be attained by whatever means, including Unforgiveable Curses and other evil deeds, there was no way out but to seek to destroy Voldemort by stealing one of his Horcruxes and then to refuse to do his bidding and die. So Regulus, having been taught from birth to believe in pureblood superiority, almost certainly joined the DEs with no clear idea of what he would be asked to do. And once he learned the truth, he stole a Horcrux, knowing that he would be murdered soon whether the theft was discovered or not. (See RAB's note, which I won't quote here.) Draco, in contrast, knows what the DEs are all about and has no qualms about using an (admittedly thwarted) Unforgiveable Curse on Harry (HBP Sectumsempra chapter), whom he blames for his father's imprisonment: "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a whisper. 'I'm going to make you pay for what you've done to my father . . .'" (OoP 851, ellipsis and italics in original). IOW, Draco intends to get revenge on Harry, and it sounds to me as if he intends to do so by taking his father's place as a DE. Rather different than merely joining up to support the pureblood ideology, which Draco surely knows is only one component of DE life, which also involves not only the three Unforgiveable Curses but other forms of Dark magic (which Draco is under the delusion that "we" need no protection from, HBP 324). Carol earlier: > Draco *volunteered* the information about the linked Vanishing Cabinets as a way for the Death Eaters to enter Hogwarts, which inevitably led to his assignment of repairing the broken cabinet. So even if he hadn't been ordered to murder Dumbledore as well, he would still have been voluntarily doing something very dangerous that could well have led to the deaths of his fellow students. > Magpie responded: > It never occured to me reading the book that Draco was supposed to have come up with the cabinet plot and brought it to Voldemort, only then to be given the extra assignment of killing DD. To me canon and the way all the adults talk about what's going on suggests something more straightforward: > Voldemort gave an assignment to Draco to kill Dumbledore, which Draco eagerly accepted as an honor and a way of avenging his family and proving himself. His plan for doing this was the Vanishing Cabinet. Bringing DEs into the school alone is a serious crime, but they themselves are just there to make sure DD gets killed. Carol again: Draco says that he found out about the link between the Vanishing Cabinets: "I was the one who realized there could be a way into Hogwarts through the [vanishing] cabinets *if I fixed the broken one*" (587). So he not only voluntarily informed Voldemort of a way for the DEs to get into Hogwarts, he apparently volunteered to fix the cabinet as well. What he did not anticipate was the additional task of murdering Voldemort, which was assigned to him by Voldemort, "a great honor," as Bellatrix calls it. Later Narcissa states that LV has "chosen" Draco (HBP 33) for the dangerous task that she fears will result in her son's death--clearly, not fixing the cabinet (which isn't dangerous in itself and which she may know no more about than Snape does) but killing Dumbledore, which, Narcissa starts to say, "the Dark Lord himself" has failed to do (33). That the assignment to kill Dumbledore is separate from the assignment to fix the Vanishing Cabinet is also evident from Draco's desperate attempts to murder Dumbledore using the cursed necklace and the poisoned mead. Snape knows about the mission to kill Dumbledore (and agrees with Narcissa that it was assigned to Draco as a way of punishing Lucius), but Draco keeps him in the dark about the vanishing cabinet, which he volunteered to fix before he knew the use to which Voldemort would want him to put it (not just using the cabinet to get DEs into Hogwarts, but using them as back up when he murders Dumbledore). This second assignment is the "honor" that LV has granted him, the means by which he'll acquire "glory" and be honored above all others. The original assignment, fixing the cabinet to get the DEs into Hogwarts, which he originally volunteered to do, has become the means to that end. Carol, who sees no evidence that Regulus ever committed any crime worse than joining the DEs, in marked contrast to Draco, who has recklessly endangered the lives of everyone at Hogwarts through fear for his own skin From catlady at wicca.net Sat May 13 21:32:31 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:32:31 -0000 Subject: Beauty /Ghost War/ Chapter 15 discussion - Dark Magic /Fleur/Umbridge/Ginny Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152185 Susanne wrote in : << So, no, I don't think Hermione is supposed to be a beauty and I'm very happy about that, because there is too much of this idea that she just "has to be beautiful" going around. As if only people with physical beauty are worthy... >> To which, "bigdaddy999197" replied in : << In the first description of Hermione JKR seems to make it a point that Hermione is rather plain. Then again she describes the reaction to her appearance when the boys saw her dressed for the ball. The word I would use is surprised. So maybe it is a matter of the ugly duckling maturing into a beautiful swan.>> I *hated* that scene of Hermione being beautiful at the ball. I consider it to be an unrealistic wish-fulfillment fantasy that proves Hermione is a Mary-Sue character. And implies that being beautiful is so very important. It would have been just as good a one-up on the other girls for them to see plain but well-groomed and happy-looking Hermione dancing with the Quidditch World Cup MVP, him smiling at her and laughing at her jokes. The story "The Ugly Duckling" seems to be a necessary metaphor for nerds and geeks who become billionaires and juvenile delinquents who become big movie stars, and maybe it is a comfort to homely girlchildren (I can't remember if I felt comforted by it), but my observation of the real world shows more pretty children growing into homely adults than homely children growing into pretty adults. "Lazy Days" wrote in : << Was there an actual wizard named Hogwart, that the school was named after, or is everyone still banking on the fact that Hogwarts is an anagram of "Ghost War?" >> I never even noticed that Hogwarts is an anagram of Ghost War! My theory is the Lake is really named Hoglake and the Forbidden Forest is really named Hogwood and the mountain behind the town is really named Hogmount and the location of the town was originally named Hogwald and the location of the school, beside the lake, was originally named Hogmeadow, all named after a legendary Caledonian Hog who lived on that mountain. And the Founders chose that site, but were slightly confused and got the names Hogwald and Hogmeadow messed up as Hogsmeade and Hogwald, so they were going to call it Hogwald School. But then Salazar Slytherin got bent out of shape because the proposed name included Godric and Helga's initials but not his, and Rowena said 'Nor mine'. So they all agreed to change it to HoGwaRS. The T may have been added by someone who thought the name referred to a plant named hogwort that I haven't been able to find out anything about. But in my wilder flights of fancy, it came from a fifth Founder, Tavish Tartanwool, who was a lesser mage than the others, but he provided the real estate -- his family traditionally lived in Hogwald, keeping the Hog from getting off its mountain and the Muggles from finding this place. And he has been lost to history because Salazar murdered him (the reason would depend on whether Salazar was already evil) and the others agreed to cover it up. Carol discussed Chapter 15 in and Ceridwen replied in : Carol: << When Harry asks how the [love] potions can be smuggled into the school despite the new precautions, Hermione explains that they're not Dark or dangerous >> Ceridwen: << Love spells and potions are `dark', in my opinion, because they remove a person's will. What is the difference between Imperius, which forces someone to do the bidding of the caster, and a love potion which forces the victim to do the bidding of the potioner? >> Catlady: The listies have mentioned ways in which love potions can be dangerous, but a pencil can be dangerous if someone stabs someone with it: a Detect Danger spell should either highlight *everything* or only things that, like unstable explosives, are a danger at that very moment. It seems to me that a Detect Dark Magic spell depends on the definition of Dark Magic. If intention were what made a spell Dark (so an AK in defense of the helpless from a murderer would not be Dark, but Levitating a heavy object with the intention of dropping it on someone's head would be Dark), it would have to be a Detect Bad Intention spell. But there are theories that what makes magic Dark is not the intention but the technique. One theory was offered that Dark Spells are those that require killing (an animal or a human) as an ingredient. But I think the only spells with killing as an ingredient that we've seen are some potions in class with formerly alive insects as ingredients and making wands with dragon heartstrings. Another theory was that, before the invention of wands, all magic was done by channelling the magic power through the wizard's body, which gradually wore out his nervous system (optional subtheories: it wore out conscience and compassion before it wore out agility and memory, it ended up by the wizard turning into a tree). Wand magic is done by channelling the magic power through the wand, and therefore doesn't damage the wizard's nervous system (maybe damages it a little bit, which is why they all seem to be slightly mad and a little bit stupid) and therefore the other kind of magic was called Dark. A simpler theory, that every bit of Dark Magic one does makes one more evil (removes another piece of one's conscience and compassion), is marred by that also happens with totally non-magical behavior, even with non-bad behavior: Every time one does a thing (e.g. gives up smoking) makes it a little easier to do next time. Carol: << In Transfiguration the next day, they attempt in front of mirrors to change the color of their eyebrows. Ron sprouts a handlebar mustache at which Hermione laughs unkindly >> Catlady: I kind of wondered if that had something to do with Movie!Lupin's moustache. Carol: << Draco reacts by calling DADA a "joke" and an "act" and sneering that "we" don't need protection against the Dark Arts. >> Ceridwen: << Draco doesn't think that knowing how to defend against Dark Arts is for people who use Dark Arts. >> Catlady: I thought that was amazing stupid of Draco, to think that being a Death Eater would prevent Dark Beasts, rival Death Eaters, and Dark Wizards from outside the club, from attacking him. Catherine wrote in : << Once Molly sees that Fleur is *really* in it for the long haul, that she truly loves Bill for who he is, and not just his looks, she changes immediately.>> I'm sure Rowling INTENDED that scene to show that Fleur truly loved Bill for himself, but it quickly occured to me (I think I've posted this before) that it could just as well depict Fleur wanting to marry Bill for his money (not inherited money, money that he earned as a curse-breaker or as a Gringotts executive). Nikkalmati wrote in : << She is also the one who IMHO who abuses Harry, when she forces him to cut himself by magically writing on his own hand over and over and again and again.(OTP pp. 267-69, 270-75). When I read that part I felt sick to my stomach (and I don't remember ever having that reaction to a book before). >> Yes, that was disgusting abuse. When I read it, I exclaimed out loud: "That quill is a Dark Magic Artifact." (which implies that I have some theory of what makes magic Dark. Oh well.) I expect some reply pointing out that cases of much worse child abuse occur frequently in real life (e.g. pouring gasoline on the child and setting him on fire is worse than cutting the back of his hand to draw blood). They cannot be Dark Magic because they aren't magic at all. Pippin wrote in : << Voldemort could not leave the pages of the diary, not until it had almost consumed Ginny at the end. There was no way he could leave part of himself in Ginny and part in the diary. As we know, souls cannot be split except through an act of murder, and the diary didn't kill anyone. When she threw the Diary away, she was free, except for her fear that what she had done would be found out and she would have to leave Hogwarts. In a way she's more culpable than Draco, because she knew that what she was doing was wrong, and yet she did it anyway. >> As for souls, canon: "If I say it myself, Harry, I've always been able to charm the people I needed. So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be exactly what I wanted .... I grew stronger and stronger on a diet of her deepest fears, her darkest secrets. I grew powerful, far more powerful than little Miss Weasley. Powerful enough to start feeding Miss Weasley a few of my secrets, to start pouring a little of my soul back into her. . ." So even though Diary!Tom's soul couldn't split in two and Diary!Tom could not leave the diary in bodily form, he could put part of his soul out of the diary into Ginny (part of his soul which is still connected to the other part of his soul, not split). And that part of his soul controlled her by possession, not by threats. As for possession, canon: "Of course, she didn't know what she was doing at first. It was very amusing. I wish you could have seen her new diary entries ... far more interesting, they became .... Dear Tom,"he recited, watching Harry's horrified face, `I think I'm losing my memory. There are rooster feathers all over my robes and 1 don't know how they got there. Dear Tom, l can't remember what 1 did on the night of Halloween, but a cat was attacked and I've got paint all down my front. Dear Tom, Percy keeps telling me I'm pale and I'm not myself. I think he suspects me... There was another attack today and I don't know where I was. Tom, what am I going to do? I think I'm going mad... I think I'm the one attacking everyone, Tom!" >> From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat May 13 21:44:52 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:44:52 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152186 > Potioncat: > > Love potions have been a part of fairy tales folklore for ages. There > are many > stories of young people going the "local witch" to get love potions > or amulets. > Just like divination, something always goes wrong. a_svirn: Exactly. Can you recall any folklore fairy tale where love potions are being put to good use? (Personally, I cannot. Tristan and Isolde certainly made a mess of it.) > Potioncat: If Harry had taken > the > love potion, at the point that Ron did, would Romilda have been > pleased > with the result? He would be a moon-eyed puppy, bouncing around and > annoying the daylights out of her. a_svirn: Is that what you think Tom Riddle Sr. did? There must have been more to it, since Tom Riddle Jr. was the result. > Potioncat: > JKR has shown us the danger of love potions with Merope and Tom Sr. > She's shown us the silly effects of the potions (later in HBP). But I > don't think she intends the potions to be dark. They can certainly be > misused! > a_svirn: If you say they can be *mis*used, you thereby suggest that bending other people to your will sexually can be -- in theory at least -- put to good use. That of course calls the definition of *good* into question. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 23:19:13 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 23:19:13 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152187 > Pippin: > No. Voldemort could not leave the pages of the diary, not until it > had almost consumed Ginny at the end. There was no way he could > leave part of himself in Ginny and part in the diary. > As we know, souls cannot be split except through an act of murder, > and the diary didn't kill anyone. > > When she threw the Diary away, she was free, except for her fear that > what she had done would be found out and she would have to leave > Hogwarts. In a way she's more culpable than Draco, because she knew > that what she was doing was wrong, and yet she did it anyway. Alla: I am not sure how I got myself into comparing Ginny and Draco's actions if I initially said that IMO their actions are not really comparable, but I guess arguing that possessed child is just as liable as murderous teenager makes me want to disagree with such an argument. Especially when the only thing this child knew initially was that she got an extra book among her schoolbooks and when the teenager knew that he is getting into the planning of the murder of Headmaster of Hogwarts. For canon that Ginny was quite likely possessed all the time, see Catlady's post. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152185 She said it much better than I ever could and saved me the canon- typing part too. Thanks! Moreover, assuming Ginny WAS in full control of her facilities when she stole the diary, which I most strongly disagree with, you are not arguing that she stole the diary in order to plan anybody's murders? Which is what Draco was doing through HBP ( planning murders and almost succeeding in two of them). > Carol again: ... but Draco keeps him in the dark about the vanishing > cabinet, which he volunteered to fix before he knew the use to which > Voldemort would want him to put it (not just using the cabinet to get > DEs into Hogwarts, but using them as back up when he murders > Dumbledore). Alla: I snipped your post,because I am only confused about this part of it. Draco DID volunteer to fix the cabinet, but where do you get that he volunteered to do so before he knew that he is assigned to kill Dumbledore? I am confused about chronology, I guess. I mean, I may agree with you that it was independent from assignment of killing DD, but if Draco already knew that he had this assignment, wouldn't it make more sense that it was not independent? Mgpie's reading makes more sense to me in this part, I suppose. JMO, Alla, counts to four and becomes invisible. :-) From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 23:01:43 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 16:01:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060513230143.22453.qmail@web61316.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152188 Nick: Well, what would Dumbledore say? I think the double standard comes from the fact that Draco did what he did under threat of death from Lord Voldemort. This makes him much like Regulus, no? It won't take much to redeem Draco in my eyes. Everything significantly "evil" that he's done (and not merely selfish or bratty) is because of Voldemort. Joe: So Voldemort made him whine like a little girl and then try to get Buckbeak executed because he got hurt acting like an idiot against the instructions of a teacher? Sorry trying to get Buckbeak killed and then laughing about it is evil. The big bad Voldemort making innocent little me do bad things argument is oh so very flawed as well. As Alla pointed out Draco is HAPPY and BRAGGING about being a DE. He only gets upset when all of his plans don't quite work. He would have been perfectly happy had Dumbledore died from either the poison or locket but because he didn't have the stones to do the job face to face some people think he is one kind word away from being a great guy. He had years to see that there was another side and yet as soon as he could he happily joined Voldemort merry little band of racist, murdering thugs. Oh yeah he isn't evil, no of course not. Draco could eat a kitten in the middle of Diagon Alley and some people would scream it was Voldemorts fault. If Voldemort is the reason everyone does anything bad then why don't we all think Bellatrix is being compelled to do things. Where is the sympathy for Wormtail? If Draco can't be expected to resist the power of Voldemort then how can we hold anybody responsible for anything they do? Joe From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 13 23:48:41 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:48:41 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco vs. Regulus, or vice versa (Was: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) References: Message-ID: <011001c676e7$c464a150$b880400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152189 > Let's look at the canon on Regulus, which is admittedly limited. The > first mention of him comes in OoP, "The Noble and Ancient House of Black." > > Sirius Black says: > > "No, he was murdered by Voldemort. Or on Voldemort's order, more > likely, I doubt Regulus was ever important enough to be killed by > Voldemort in person. From what I found out after he died, he got in so > far, then panicked about what he was being asked to do and tried to > back out. Well, you don't just hand in your resignation to Voldemort. > It's a lifetime of service or death" (OoP Am. ed. 112). > > So, yes, we can definitely say that Regulus refused to do something > that he found repugnant, and a boy (he was a teenager) who would > murder a Muggle or a stranger would not balk at killing his blood > traitor brother who also happened to be a member of the Order of the > Phoenix. Magpie: I admit that I lean towards assuming that killing was a line that Regulus wouldn't cross, but I don't think we can assume that killing your brother is nothing to someone who kills strangers. I could absolutely believe that a Regulus who had killed Muggles would see the light in being asked to kill his Pureblood, traitor brother, just as I believe that it meant something different to Snape to realize he'd gotten James and Lily Potter targeted for death. Regulus' own philosophy rests on there being a huge difference between Purebloods and killing Muggles. Carol: Also, as DD tells Draco, "Killing is not nearly as easy as > the innocent believe" (HBP A. ed. 586). Regulus, who "panicked and > backed out," must have found murder as difficult as Draco did. I > seriously doubt that he ever committed it. Had he done so, he would > probably have become fanatically loyal to LV as Barty Jr. did rather > than stealing and intending to destroy a Horcrux. Magpie: I do suspect that he found killing just as difficult and possibly never did it--but that doesn't make him so different than Draco to begin with. Regulus could, like Draco, not have realized he found killing impossible until he was faced with actually doing it. The DEs are not the least bit shy about letting people know murder is on the agenda. They even put "death" in their name and float their sign over murder sites. I don't think they get too many people mistakenly thinking they're just going to be distributing flyers for Pureblood Rights. And if someone does join the DEs thinking he's going to be handing out flyers that's not a case of not realizing what they were really about. That's having to do yourself what you're supporting others do. Pureblood rights isn't even mentioned in canon that I recall. They want to get rid of Muggleborns and purify the race. Carol: > > Clearly, from both Sirius's words and JKR's, Regulus did not know what > he was getting into. Draco, however, had a Death Eater for a father, > was well acquainted with other DE kids, and had a DE aunt who was > arrested for Crucioing the Longbottoms. If he didn't know that before > the escape of the DEs from Azkaban, he certainly knew it after the > article on the escape was published in the Daily Prophet. And Aunt > Bellatrix would have made no secret of her deeds in the service of the > Dark Lord, including the murder of her own cousin. (Regulus, too, was > her cousin, but he died before these events occurred, and she was > considerably older than he was. I doubt that he was in her confidence > regarding the usual activities of Death Eaters.) Magpie: So Draco has a father who was a DE--that doesn't mean he knows what it's like to experience being a DE. In CoS Draco's kept completely out of the loop--but all the students experience having classmates petrified. He's not even involved in the Muggle baiting at the QWC--a cruel joke that nonetheless consisted of performing a spell known to be used as a joke on other wizards. The Muggles aren't murdered. Draco's friends wouldn't have experienced the real thing any more than he would have. Each book up until Book VI has Draco being clueless about death as a real thing, and the author's always made sure he hasn't actually killed anyone. Regulus had former housemates who were DEs, and a cousin, and was living in a time when the news was full of Voldemort's doings. Everyone pretty much knows the type of stuff the DEs are about. Regulus would have read stuff in the papers too. The Longbottoms happened after Voldemort was vanquished. It wasn't the first horrible act. Basically, it's easy for me to imagine a boy joining the DEs with a romanticized view of what they were like, and a misguided idea of how he himself will take to the life. But that's different than joining the DEs thinking they're not what they are. Carol: > > More canon for Regulus not knowing what he was in for: > > "'Were--were your parents Death Eaters as well?' [asks Harry]. > "'No, no, but believe me, they thought Voldemort had the right idea, > they were all for the purification of the wizarding race, getting rid > of Muggle-borns and having pure-bloods in charge. They weren't alone, > either, there were quite a few people *before Voldemort showed his > true colors,* who thought he had the right idea about things. . . . > *They got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get > power,* though. But I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right > little hero for joining up at first" (OoP 112, ellipsis in original). > Note "at first and "before Voldemort showed his true colors." Once it > became clear that Voldemort intended to make war, torturing and > murdering nonsupporters and generally creating a reign of terror, they > no longer thought he had the right idea. They "got cold feet." Magpie: It's your interpretation to say that what Sirius means by "what he was willing to do to gain power" refers to his family having a problem with murdering nonsupporters and waging war and torturing--a reaction that makes them more like good people. But it could just as easily refer to Voldemort's willingness to murder and torture supporters or their families. The first part of what Sirius says about "purifying the wizard race" and "getting rid of the Muggleborns" is flat-out genocide talk. It's a group dedicated to purifying the race and getting rid of people not of that race and Regulus joined it. His family's not becoming DEs doesn't necessarily come out of a moral decision on their part. Even if they had trouble with the murdering of nonsupporters and war, they still absolutely support the core of what Voldemort is about. There's no pretty illusion there. Carol: Nor did > they ever become Death Eaters. But for Regulus, who learned too late > that Voldemort's cause was really his own power (and immortality), to > be attained by whatever means, including Unforgiveable Curses and > other evil deeds, there was no way out but to seek to destroy > Voldemort by stealing one of his Horcruxes and then to refuse to do > his bidding and die. Magpie: That beginning part "But for Regulus, who learned too late that Voldemort's cause was really his own power (and immortality), to be attained by whatever means, including Unforgiveable Curses and other evil deeds," can easily apply to Draco Malfoy. There's no reason to assume that he knew that Voldemort's cause was really his own immortality. That Voldemort is willing to use Unforgivable curses and other evil deeds was, imo, just as known to Regulus Black as Draco. Carol: > So Regulus, having been taught from birth to believe in pureblood > superiority, almost certainly joined the DEs with no clear idea of > what he would be asked to do. Magpie: Depends on what you mean by "no clear idea what he would be asked to do." Nobody has a clear idea what they will be asked to do until they're asked. And then once they've been asked they might not have a clear idea of what that really means until they try to do it. Regulus did know, apparently, that he was joining up to purify the wizard race and get rid of Muggleborns. That's what the DEs are about and Regulus and Draco both grew up being told this was a good thing. Carol:> > Draco, in contrast, knows what the DEs are all about and has no qualms > about using an (admittedly thwarted) Unforgiveable Curse on Harry (HBP > Sectumsempra chapter), whom he blames for his father's imprisonment: Magpie: And Harry throws Crucios at Bella and Snape--because Crucio is a very attractive curse for teenaged boys who want to throw their own pain at other people. I see no reason to imagine Regulus Black so different from either of them, and shocked at the mere idea of using an Unforgivable. Carol: > > "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a > whisper. 'I'm going to make you pay for what you've done to my father > . . .'" (OoP 851, ellipsis and italics in original). IOW, Draco > intends to get revenge on Harry, and it sounds to me as if he intends > to do so by taking his father's place as a DE. Rather different than > merely joining up to support the pureblood ideology, which Draco > surely knows is only one component of DE life, which also involves not > only the three Unforgiveable Curses but other forms of Dark magic > (which Draco is under the delusion that "we" need no protection from, > HBP 324). Magpie: Are you suggesting that joining the DEs soley for racist reasons somehow makes it better than having a personal desire to take one's father's place and avenge one's family? And why assume that Dark Magic is something only Draco--who does not have any more practical experience in being a DE than Regulus did--knows the DEs are about? JKR says Regulus was "attracted to it" as Draco is--attracted to what? I think the Dark Arts, which Snape too was supposedly so attracted to, is a part of the DEs known to everybody. > Carol again: > Draco says that he found out about the link between the Vanishing > Cabinets: "I was the one who realized there could be a way into > Hogwarts through the [vanishing] cabinets *if I fixed the broken one*" > (587). So he not only voluntarily informed Voldemort of a way for the > DEs to get into Hogwarts, he apparently volunteered to fix the cabinet > as well. What he did not anticipate was the additional task of > murdering Voldemort, which was assigned to him by Voldemort, "a great > honor," as Bellatrix calls it. Magpie: I don't see how we go from Draco saying that he was the one who figured out the possibility of the Cabinet being a portal to the idea that he went to Voldemort with this information and then was given the additional task of killing Dumbledore. It seemed to me that what we were told was that his task was killing Dumbledore, period, without any details about the scene where he was given it. He was supposed to fail at it and so be killed. Draco thought he could actually do it because he could get DEs into Hogwarts for backup--and yes, freely offered this information. Carol: Later Narcissa states that LV has > "chosen" Draco (HBP 33) for the dangerous task that she fears will > result in her son's death--clearly, not fixing the cabinet (which > isn't dangerous in itself and which she may know no more about than > Snape does) but killing Dumbledore, which, Narcissa starts to say, > "the Dark Lord himself" has failed to do (33). > > That the assignment to kill Dumbledore is separate from the assignment > to fix the Vanishing Cabinet is also evident from Draco's desperate > attempts to murder Dumbledore using the cursed necklace and the > poisoned mead. Snape knows about the mission to kill Dumbledore (and > agrees with Narcissa that it was assigned to Draco as a way of > punishing Lucius), but Draco keeps him in the dark about the vanishing > cabinet, which he volunteered to fix before he knew the use to which > Voldemort would want him to put it (not just using the cabinet to get > DEs into Hogwarts, but using them as back up when he murders > Dumbledore). This second assignment is the "honor" that LV has granted > him, the means by which he'll acquire "glory" and be honored above all > others. The original assignment, fixing the cabinet to get the DEs > into Hogwarts, which he originally volunteered to do, has become the > means to that end. > Magpie: No, I think canon suggests the assignment to fix the cabinets is not separate to the plan to kill Voldemort at all. Draco has one assignment: kill Dumbledore. Snape, Narcissa, DD and Bella all know this. Draco's plan to kill Dumbledore involves fixing the Vanishing cabinet and getting DEs into the castle for backup. That's the only thing they're there for that night. Snape knows Draco is trying to kill Dumbledore, but never knows any of the ways he's going about it until they happen. When Draco has trouble fixing the cabinet he tries other ways of killing. Had the necklace or the mead worked, it doesn't seem that he would have had to fix the cabinet at all. If the cabinet plot were separate from the murder the DEs would have had some orders once they were in the castle, but they were only there to give Draco a shot at Dumbledore. If the big plan was just getting them into Hogwarts, they completely wasted a golden opportunity by standing around telling Draco to kill Dumbledore and then leaving, never to get that shot inside the castle again. Carol: > Carol, who sees no evidence that Regulus ever committed any crime > worse than joining the DEs, in marked contrast to Draco, who has > recklessly endangered the lives of everyone at Hogwarts through fear > for his own skin Magpie: Well, of course we've got no evidence of Regulus committing any crime except joining the DEs. That's all we know about him is that he joined them and then left them with a parting shot at Voldemort. My point is that joining the DEs is a significant act in itself and can't be explained away into something not so bad. I don't take his later enlightenment and heroic act to mean he never thought the DEs would use Dark Magic because he himself was above such things. I think he was a real, enthusiastic DE recruit, as was Snape and as was Draco. There's no evidence as of yet to assume that any one boy was more aware of what he was getting into, or less in control of his will, or just not a Death Eater really. Regulus supported exactly what the Death Eaters were about: the purification of the wizard race. Iow, genocide. -m From winkadup at yahoo.com Sat May 13 23:33:41 2006 From: winkadup at yahoo.com (Wendy Dupuy) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 16:33:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape could have? Message-ID: <20060513233341.35289.qmail@web34107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152190 I have a question. At the end of HBP after the "death" of Dumbledore, when Harry is chasing Snape, why then did Snape not kill him? If Harry had the chance he would have. Snape could have, why didn't he if he was truly on the Dark Lord's side? winkadup From minluko at yahoo.com Sun May 14 01:03:10 2006 From: minluko at yahoo.com (Lucy Minkov) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 18:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape could have? In-Reply-To: <20060513233341.35289.qmail@web34107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060514010310.6674.qmail@web38407.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152191 Wendy Dupuy wrote: I have a question. At the end of HBP after the "death" of Dumbledore, when Harry is chasing Snape, why then did Snape not kill him? If Harry had the chance he would have. Snape could have, why didn't he if he was truly on the Dark Lord's side? Minluko: If Snape is on our side, he didn't kill Harry for obvious reasons. If he is on LV's side, he let Harry go because LV wants to kill Harry personally. I don't have the book with me right now, but he tells another DE something like that:"We have to leave him (Harry). Remember our orders! He belongs to the Dark Lord." Hope it helps. minluko From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sun May 14 01:20:04 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 01:20:04 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152192 Potioncat: > If Harry had taken the love potion, at the point that Ron did, would Romilda have been pleased with the result? He would be a moon-eyed puppy, bouncing around and annoying the daylights out of her. > > a_svirn: > Is that what you think Tom Riddle Sr. did? There must have been more to it, since Tom Riddle Jr. was the result. Steven1965aaaa now: I don't think you can go by the example of Ron. Remember, that potion was beyond date, Slughorn said that can strengthen it, Harry said that would explain a lot. From penhaligon at gmail.com Sun May 14 01:35:38 2006 From: penhaligon at gmail.com (Jane Penhaligon) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 18:35:38 -0700 Subject: Dumbledore's Will Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152193 As we have a precedent that wizards indeed have legal wills, I have been wondering what Dumbledore's will might contain and how Dumbledore might possibly continue to assist Harry "beyond the grave." In HBP, we saw how memories can be "bottled" and played in the Pensieve. Considering that Dumbledore knew that his death was imminent, could he possibly have stored memories that may be able to help Harry in his quest in Book 7? If Dumbledore had saved additional memories, other than the ones he's already shown to Harry, and left those and the Pensieve to Harry in his will, this could prove a valuable tool for Harry as he hunts down the horcruxes. I also strongly suspect that there is a phoenix for Harry in Book 7 as well. Suzanne aka "Jane Penhaligon" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun May 14 02:59:09 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 02:59:09 -0000 Subject: Snape could have? In-Reply-To: <20060514010310.6674.qmail@web38407.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152194 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lucy Minkov wrote: > > Minluko: > If Snape is on our side, he didn't kill Harry for obvious reasons. If he is on LV's side, he let Harry go because LV wants to kill Harry personally. I don't have the book with me right now, but he tells another DE something like that:"We have to leave him (Harry). Remember our orders! He belongs to the Dark Lord." > Hope it helps. > Tonks: Also if Snape was really a DE wouldn't he have kidnapped Harry so the Dark Lord could finish him off? How is he going to explain to LV why when he had the chance to grab Harry, he didn't? Tonks_op From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 14 03:15:37 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 03:15:37 -0000 Subject: Beauty /Ghost War/ Chapter 15 discussion - Dark Magic /Fleur/Umbridge/Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152195 Catlady: > As for possession, canon: "Of course, she didn't know what she was > doing at first. It was very amusing. I wish you could have seen her > new diary entries ... far more interesting, they became .... Dear > Tom,"he recited, watching Harry's horrified face, `I think I'm losing > my memory. There are rooster feathers all over my robes and 1 don't > know how they got there. Dear Tom, l can't remember what 1 did on the > night of Halloween, but a cat was attacked and I've got paint all down > my front. Dear Tom, Percy keeps telling me I'm pale and I'm not > myself. I think he suspects me... There was another attack today and I > don't know where I was. Tom, what am I going to do? I think I'm going > mad... I think I'm the one attacking everyone, Tom!" >> > Pippin: Yes, exactly. Ginny has no memory of what happened while she was possessed. But she remembered what she was going to say to Harry at breakfast the morning she was taken. "Harry --oh, Harry--I tried to tell you at b-breakfast, but I c-couldn't say it in front of Percy -- it was *me*, Harry--but I-- I s-swear I didn't mean to--R-Riddle made me, he t-took me over--" She didn't attack anyone intentionally, but she eventually figured out that Riddle was making her do it. She was not possessed all the time, because she remembers trying to tell Harry what was going on. She had also been warned about things that think for themselves, and must have heard the same warnings Ron had heard about enchanted books. I'm not inclined to believe everything Riddle says, but I do believe Ginny stole the book back of her own will. He didn't *want* her to do it, or so he says, and I can't see why he would be lying about that. Pippin realizing that Ginny got her comeuppance in HBP for ratting on Percy kissing Penelope in CoS From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 03:28:56 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 03:28:56 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152196 Carol earlier: > > ... but Draco keeps him in the dark about the vanishing cabinet, which he volunteered to fix before he knew the use to which Voldemort would want him to put it (not just using the cabinet to get DEs into Hogwarts, but using them as back up when he murders Dumbledore). > > > Alla: > > I snipped your post,because I am only confused about this part of it. > > Draco DID volunteer to fix the cabinet, but where do you get that he > volunteered to do so before he knew that he is assigned to kill > Dumbledore? > > I am confused about chronology, I guess. I mean, I may agree with > you that it was independent from assignment of killing DD, but if > Draco already knew that he had this assignment, wouldn't it make > more sense that it was not independent? > > Mgpie's reading makes more sense to me in this part, I suppose. Carol responds: As I read it, he figured out that the Vanishing Cabinets were linked while he was still at school in OoP. After the incident at the MoM, when his father was arrested, he determined to get revenge by joining the DEs. During the summer, he went to Voldemort to give him this information and volunteered to fix the Vanishing cabinet, at which time Voldemort took advantage of the opportunity to punish Lucius Malfoy's mistake and simultaneously take advantage of Draco's Vanishing Cabinet idea by assigning Draco to murder Dumbledore, with or without the aid of the Death Eaters. Or that's how I see it. I doubt that Voldemort came after Draco to recruit him. It makes more sense to me that Draco went to him, especially given Draco's mood at the end of OoP and the precious discovery that he wanted to share with the Dark Lord to impress him. So the whole fix the cabinet, get the DEs into Hogwarts, and kill Dumbledore became merged together as a kind of initiation for the new DE. Meanwhile Snape was informed of the general plan (Draco was assigned to kill Dumbledore) but not the details (fixing the Vanishing Cabinet, which was Draco's secret plan in HBP). Do you see a different sequence of events, with Voldemort actively recruiting Draco? Certainly LV assigned him the job of killing Dumbledore ("It''s my job; he gave it to me"), but I'm not aware of any canon evidence that the original contact between Voldemort and Draco was Voldemort's idea. Draco was proud of his discovery and eager to share it with LV, both for his own "glory" and revenge against dumbledore and Harry. I can't see Voldemort coming to Draco, saying, "I have an assignment for you: Murder Dumbledore," and Draco saying, "Oh, I have the perfect way to do that. I'll fix the Vanishing Cabinet and create a passageway between Hogwarts and Borgin and Burkes." At which point Voldemort would either need to use Legilimency or require an explanation to know what he was talking about. It must have been the other way around; Draco told LV about the passageway and volunteered to fix the cabinet, after which Voldemort gave him the additional assignment, or ultimatum, of killing Dumbledore, with the DEs as back up. At least that's how the evidence reads to me. Carol From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun May 14 03:55:20 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 03:55:20 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152197 > a_svirn: > Exactly. Can you recall any folklore fairy tale where love potions > are being put to good use? (Personally, I cannot. Tristan and Isolde > certainly made a mess of it.) Potioncat: I'm not saying Love Potions are a good idea. I'm saying they aren't dark...at least not in this story. > > a_svirn: > Is that what you think Tom Riddle Sr. did? There must have been more > to it, since Tom Riddle Jr. was the result. Potioncat: Yeah, these were adults who thought they were in love and were married. But...whatever its effects on Tom, it wasn't a real relationship and Merope knew it. Unfortunately, it caused a big disaster. What she felt probably wasn't love either. > > a_svirn: > If you say they can be *mis*used, you thereby suggest that bending > other people to your will sexually can be -- in theory at least -- > put to good use. That of course calls the definition of *good* into > question. Potioncat: Hold on. You're looking on these as date-rape-potions. That isn't what they are. And no, I would not condone something that allowed you to bend other people to your will...sexually or other wise. OK, put these characters in the hands of a different author and Bellatrix could have loads of fun with the potions. But I don't think JKR had anything like that in mind. Who knows what the effect would have been Harry if he'd taken the love potion while it was fresh. We know Molly made a love potion in her Hogwarts days. We know the potions are being sold openly. And like I said, JKR has shown us how they can go horribly wrong. I think it's her way of looking at different ways of being in love or different ways of expressing love...not all of them healthy. But love potions are not out of place in a series that includes unicorns, witches and magic. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 04:00:08 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 04:00:08 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152198 > Pippin: > Yes, exactly. Ginny has no memory of what happened while she was > possessed. But she remembered what she was going to say to > Harry at breakfast the morning she was taken. > > "Harry --oh, Harry--I tried to tell you at b-breakfast, but I > c-couldn't say it in front of Percy -- it was *me*, Harry--but I-- > I s-swear I didn't mean to--R-Riddle made me, he t-took me over--" > > She didn't attack anyone intentionally, but she eventually figured > out that Riddle was making her do it. She was not possessed all > the time, because she remembers trying to tell Harry what was > going on. She had also been warned about things that think for > themselves, and must have heard the same warnings Ron had > heard about enchanted books. > > I'm not inclined to believe everything Riddle says, but I do believe > Ginny stole the book back of her own will. He didn't *want* her to > do it, or so he says, and I can't see why he would be lying about that. Alla: Okay, midnight here, so I am going to post briefly before I go to bed. How do you figure that the fact that Ginny remembered SOME things equals her not being possessed at all? Isn't Riddle just easing his grip on her when diary was not with her equally possible? In any event, we are definitely not going to agree on Ginny being possessed all the time or not, but won't you at least agree that Ginny was WEAKENED significantly by her struggles with Riddle at the rime she was possessed. I mean, I am having trouble to imagine a scenario for at least part of Riddle not being in her head all the time, but for the sake of the argument let's say that I do. Woudn't you agree that Ginny was at least emotionally ill, tired , upset in the brief period of time that she was not possessed and not in the good state of mind to make any rational decisions? As to being warned about enchanted books, well, sure, she was. THAT is the part where eleven year old girl made a mistake, which was her own. She forgot to be careful about the books who keep their brains in the unknown location. She was so desperate for a friend that she did not check where the diary's brains are and carelessly trusted it. That makes her an attempted killer just as Draco was? Alla, still scratching her head over Ginny being more liable than Draco. From spirittalks at gmail.com Sun May 14 04:30:52 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 00:30:52 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore's Will References: Message-ID: <00e401c6770f$3031e970$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 152199 >Suzanne aka "Jane Penhaligon": >As we have a precedent that wizards indeed have legal wills, I have been >wondering what Dumbledore's will might contain and how Dumbledore might >possibly continue to assist Harry "beyond the grave." >In HBP, we saw how memories can be "bottled" and played in the Pensieve. >Considering that Dumbledore knew that his death was imminent, could he >possibly have stored memories that may be able to help Harry in his quest >in Book 7? If Dumbledore had saved additional memories, other than the ones >he's already shown to Harry, and left those and the Pensieve to Harry in >his will, this could prove a valuable tool for Harry as he hunts down >thehorcruxes. Kim (me): This is my guess too, Suzanne. I posted about it a few weeks ago. I remember long ago when I saw the original Star Wars (never saw the new ones) when they were fiddling with R2D2 and he kept playing holographs of what's his name? Ben? who gave him advice and information. I think the pensieve is going to be left to Harry and he'll jump in whenever he's facing something he doesn't understand. Dumbledore will give him advice and Harry will respond and Dumbledore will have a prepared answer for how he thinks Harry will have responded. And in that way it will be as if they are conversing. THEN of course, my hero Dumbledore will return alive and well and living in the suburbs through some heroism by eternally good and kind Lupin. Hey, the books ARE fantasy aren't they? So I'm adding a bit of my own. And I will never accept, even if the evidence stares me in the face, that Lupin went bad. Kim From minluko at yahoo.com Sun May 14 01:23:06 2006 From: minluko at yahoo.com (Lucy Minkov) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 18:23:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060514012306.8866.qmail@web38406.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152200 Steve wrote: bboyminn: >> I confess I completely missed the connection to Draco listening. I even scanned the books trying to find where the information is revealed but was at a loss. As to 'other' misleading explanation, I think it is safe to say that frequently in JKR's world things are not what they seem, and there will be plenty of stunning revelation in the next and final book. << Hi, If you still didn't find it, here it is: "I got the idea of poisoning the mead from the Mudblood Granger..., I heard her talking in the library about Filch not recognizing potions." (HBP, US ed., p.589, The Lightning Struck Tower). Hope it helped. Misha From minluko at yahoo.com Sun May 14 03:47:49 2006 From: minluko at yahoo.com (minluko) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 03:47:49 -0000 Subject: Snape could have? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152201 > Tonks: > Also if Snape was really a DE wouldn't he have kidnapped Harry so the Dark Lord could finish him off? How is he going to explain to LV why when he had the chance to grab Harry, he didn't? < Yeah, I thought about it myself. Snape was not even alone, the brother and sister DEs and the enormous one were with him. Surely, the four of them could overcome Harry and take him with them. Well, it proves once more that Snape is DDM, IMO. As for how he will explain all this to LV, I really don't know, but Snape is a cunning man, he'll think of something. Maybe LV will be so happy about DD's death that he won't notice how suspicious it looks. minluko From juli17 at aol.com Sun May 14 05:22:19 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 01:22:19 EDT Subject: Beauty /Ghost War/ Chapter 15 discussion - Dark Magic /Fleur/Umb Message-ID: <410.1a78b53.3198188b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152202 Catherine wrote in : << Once Molly sees that Fleur is *really* in it for the long haul, that she truly loves Bill for who he is, and not just his looks, she changes immediately.>> Catlady replied: I'm sure Rowling INTENDED that scene to show that Fleur truly loved Bill for himself, but it quickly occured to me (I think I've posted this before) that it could just as well depict Fleur wanting to marry Bill for his money (not inherited money, money that he earned as a curse-breaker or as a Gringotts executive). Julie: How does she know Bill will ever be able to work again? And how much does a curse-breaker or a Gringotts executive earn? Couldn't Fleur just find herself some other nice-looking guy who earns a decent wage, if that's all she cares about? And while she's at it, maybe a guy who isn't from a "traitor" family with a clock on the wall pointing out that said family is constantly in mortal danger-- meaning she is by association also in mortal danger? Not too bright, this Fleur. Besides, if even a healthy good-looking Bill is the *best* a golddigging Fleur can do, that doesn't say much for the supposedly irresistible seductive powers of a Veela. Or she doesn't know how to use those powers the right way! (No offense against our dear, free-spirited Bill Weasley because he's not exactly a "great catch" in the more avaricious meaning of the term!) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 05:23:41 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 05:23:41 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152203 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > the detestable thing would be NOT to deal with these issues. Sorry, > but any work that approves of the abuse of children is, IMO, > reprehensible, and good for nothing but mulch. > > > Lupinlore > But Rowling doesn't "approve" of Snape's behavior. When asked why Dumbledore allows Snape to teach, she basically said that "there are all sorts of lessons in life; horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!" Snape's behavior towards children is at the very least mean- spirited, but one of the lessons children learn from Rowling is that mean-spirited teachers and students and all sorts of other people exist in the world, and they don't always receive the punishment we think they should. I have a daughter, and the last thing I want her to think is that people always get what they deserve. They don't, and thinking so, or thinking that literature (especially for children) should portray it as such is at best naive. Leslie41 From juli17 at aol.com Sun May 14 05:36:27 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 01:36:27 EDT Subject: Snape could have? Message-ID: <45e.39ea0d.31981bdb@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152204 > Minluko: > If Snape is on our side, he didn't kill Harry for obvious reasons. If he is on LV's side, he let Harry go because LV wants to kill Harry personally. I don't have the book with me right now, but he tells another DE something like that:"We have to leave him (Harry). Remember our orders! He belongs to the Dark Lord." > Hope it helps. > Tonks: Also if Snape was really a DE wouldn't he have kidnapped Harry so the Dark Lord could finish him off? How is he going to explain to LV why when he had the chance to grab Harry, he didn't? Julie: Good question. I suppose one could assume LV labelled Harry as "hands off" period, as he wants to be the one not only to kill Harry but to capture/lure him into his lair. It doesn't seem very logical, but LV has never thought logically. So Snape, good or bad, would have reason to leave Harry behind, and nothing to explain to LV, as he only acted as ordered. (Interestingly, a DDM!Snape would also have reason to encourage LV's Harry obsession to the point where LV would not allow any other DEs to capture or kill Harry.) Alternately, Snape could say that he was barely able to make it out of Hogwarts without trying to bring Harry along, though the DEs who were present aren't likely to confirm that scenario. BTW, the more interesting question to me has always been why didn't Snape allow the DE to crucio Harry, or better yet why didn't Snape crucio Harry himself? If he's DDM the answer is obvious. If he's ESE or OFH, it's not so obvious. I doubt LV cares if Harry suffers a little pain, so long as he's not rendered insane. And Snape hates Harry, with no deliberate exaggeration of that feeling required or likely if he's ESE or OFH. He has no reason *not* to enjoy a bit of torture on the bane of his existence these past six miserable years at Hogwarts. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elfundeb at gmail.com Sun May 14 10:29:22 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 06:29:22 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0605140329o630e7172re155f86409b7e6e2@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152205 Carol writes: As I read it, he figured out that the Vanishing Cabinets were linked while he was still at school in OoP. After the incident at the MoM, when his father was arrested, he determined to get revenge by joining the DEs. During the summer, he went to Voldemort to give him this information and volunteered to fix the Vanishing cabinet, at which time Voldemort took advantage of the opportunity to punish Lucius Malfoy's mistake and simultaneously take advantage of Draco's Vanishing Cabinet idea by assigning Draco to murder Dumbledore, with or without the aid of the Death Eaters. Or that's how I see it. I doubt that Voldemort came after Draco to recruit him. It makes more sense to me that Draco went to him, especially given Draco's mood at the end of OoP and the precious discovery that he wanted to share with the Dark Lord to impress him. So the whole fix the cabinet, get the DEs into Hogwarts, and kill Dumbledore became merged together as a kind of initiation for the new DE. Debbie: While I agree with you that Draco joined the DEs voluntarily, and that Voldemort then assigned Draco his task to kill Dumbledore, I'm not convinced the Vanishing Cabinets had anything to do with it. My reading of the text has always been that Draco was planning to surprise everyone with his cleverness *after* he succeeded in killing Dumbledore, which was why the two were linked in his mind. I think Draco offered himself up to Voldemort to take his father's place, perhaps with a view to avenging those who were responsible. And, typical teen, he was thrilled to have been given an adult task (Bella said he seemed "glad at the chance to prove himself, excited at the prospect"). The matter of how to execute the task, however, was left up to him. It was at that point, I think, that he decided to use his preexisting knowledge of the Vanishing Cabinets to execute his plan. But this wasn't an essential part of his job; it was an extra that would make him "Voldemort's favorite", if he could only figure out how to fix the cabinet. It wasn't really necessary (except to provide backup for an escape), though, because Draco could have killed Dumbledore anytime, but for a perceived need for backup or cover. If the repair of the cabinet had been part of his task, i.e., there was a single plan to breach the Hogwarts defences and kill Dumbledore, there would have been no reason for Draco to resort to the cursed necklace or the poisoned mead. Draco became increasingly focused on the cabinets as an essential element of the plan to kill Dumbledore after his other two alternatives failed; Voldemort was not going to kill him if he didn't fix the cabinets, only if he failed to kill Dumbledore. Thus, Draco's anguish over his failure to repair the Vanishing Cabinet was because he felt he had run out of options. It doesn't appear that Draco needed to tell Voldemort his plan in order to secure DEs as backup. The text suggests that he may have recruited his assistants on his own, because if he had asked Voldemort, wouldn't Snape have been aware of it? (At least if you take at face value, as I do, Snape's statement that he was told about Draco's task before the UV.) He tells Snape the evening of Slughorn's Christmas party that he had assistants for his task, and better ones than Crabbe and Goyle. It's unclear who gave the DEs their orders to let Draco take care of Dumbledore himself. Maybe, since it was Draco's operation, those orders came from him. Carol: Meanwhile Snape was informed of the general plan (Draco was assigned to kill Dumbledore) but not the details (fixing the Vanishing Cabinet, which was Draco's secret plan in HBP). Debbie: The fact that Snape was unaware of Draco's plan for the Vanishing Cabinet, in my view, creates an inference that it was not part of Draco's task. It was Draco's creative idea which, as he brags to Dumbledore, he withheld from Snape purposely so that all the credit from its success would belong to him. Draco's statement about being the first to realize the possibilities of the cabinet is interesting, but he may have been referring only to the DEs he recruited to assist him, or even merely Montague and the other Slytherins he told about his experience. Carol: Do you see a different sequence of events, with Voldemort actively recruiting Draco? Certainly LV assigned him the job of killing Dumbledore ("It''s my job; he gave it to me"), but I'm not aware of any canon evidence that the original contact between Voldemort and Draco was Voldemort's idea. Draco was proud of his discovery and eager to share it with LV, both for his own "glory" and revenge against dumbledore and Harry. Debbie: The full quote is, "It's my job, he gave it to me and I'm doing it. I've got a plan and it's going to work, it's just taking a bit longer than I thought it would." The job is to kill Dumbledore, and the plan is to use the Vanishing Cabinets. I don't see the plan as preceding the job. Carol: I can't see Voldemort coming to Draco, saying, "I have an assignment for you: Murder Dumbledore," and Draco saying, "Oh, I have the perfect way to do that. I'll fix the Vanishing Cabinet and create a passageway between Hogwarts and Borgin and Burkes." At which point Voldemort would either need to use Legilimency or require an explanation to know what he was talking about. Debbie: No, but I can see (i) Draco offering himself as a DE to avenge his father's arrest, (ii) receiving the task to kill Dumbledore, (iii) realizing that he can use the cabinets if he can fix them, (iv) telling Voldemort that if given time, he can get DEs into the castle (or perhaps Voldemort picked this up through legilimency), and (v) feeling pressure to make that means work in order to secure the glory he craves. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From elfundeb at gmail.com Sun May 14 11:42:06 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 07:42:06 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco vs. Regulus, or vice versa (Was: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: References: <00be01c676be$0d1ce8a0$b880400c@Spot> Message-ID: <80f25c3a0605140442r2133d055ub1e5b86402c1d4cd@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152206 Magpie: > We don't know what Regulus was ordered to do and refused. For all we know he'd killed other people and then was assigned to kill Sirius and balked at that. All we know, imo, was that Regulus ultimately decided that Voldemort was wrong and took action to bring him down--something Draco has never done. > But we don't know that early Regulus before he made that decision, was so different from Draco. Debbie: Actually, I'm surprised we haven't spent more time speculating on the real reason why Regulus balked at his task, and, indeed what that task was. Are we giving too much credit to Sirius' biased view, or is it not that important? I agree that it's quite likely the suggestion that what put Regulus over the edge was the suggestion that he kill his own brother. JKR's comparison of Draco and Regulus supports this. Had Draco's task been to kill some nameless muggle, he might have overcome his issues. But he was commanded to kill the headmaster of his school. While Draco certainly wasn't a fan of Dumbledore and his civil rights agenda, that doesn't necessarily translate into wanting to kill him (though he evidently imagined that he did). Similarly, just because Sirius was a blood traitor who had been disowned by his parents doesn't necessarily make fratricide easier -- especially when the killing is coolly planned in advance. Who's to say Regulus didn't join the DEs in part as a way of proving to big brother that he wasn't "soft" or an "idiot" who "panicked" when the going got rough. Carol again: Granted, JKR herself makes a comparison between Regulus and Draco: "JKR: That doesn't necessarily show that Voldemort killed him, personally, but Sirius himself suspected that Regulus got in a little too deep. Like Draco. He was attracted to it, but the reality of what it meant was way too much to handle." So, yes, we can definitely say that Regulus refused to do something that he found repugnant, and a boy (he was a teenager) who would murder a Muggle or a stranger would not balk at killing his blood traitor brother who also happened to be a member of the Order of the Phoenix. Also, as DD tells Draco, "Killing is not nearly as easy as the innocent believe" (HBP A. ed. 586). Regulus, who "panicked and backed out," must have found murder as difficult as Draco did. I seriously doubt that he ever committed it. Had he done so, he would probably have become fanatically loyal to LV as Barty Jr. did rather than stealing and intending to destroy a Horcrux. Debbie: We, of course, don't know whether Regulus "panicked" as Sirius suggests or whether he made a calculated decision that he could not continue to support Voldemort, given the terms (and length) of the engagement. If R.A.B. and Regulus are indeed the same person (and I will certainly eat crow if they're not), then the evidence certainly suggests that he didn't simply panic; he went to a great deal of trouble to do what was within his power to thwart Voldemort and left a note indicating that he was willingly facing death. JKR suggested that Regulus and Draco trod the same path and both found what was expected of them as DEs "too much to handle", but R.A.B.'sactions are courageous, whereas what we saw of Draco on the Tower was only cowardice. For there to be a true parallel, Draco will have to do some growing up in Book 7. My view is that JKR's insistence on talking about Regulus in the Melissa-and-Emerson interview was her way of bringing Regulus to the forefront and suggesting to fans that this would be a fruitful subject for speculation. Carol: So Regulus, having been taught from birth to believe in pureblood superiority, almost certainly joined the DEs with no clear idea of what he would be asked to do. And once he learned the truth, he stole a Horcrux, knowing that he would be murdered soon whether the theft was discovered or not. (See RAB's note, which I won't quote here.) Debbie: "Voldemort's true colors" could just as easily mean his equal disregard for his followers as well as his enemies. The DEs are not connected to one another by ideology, but solely by commitment to Voldemort's cult of personality, with no duty but to obey Voldemort. Forever. What of the possibility that Voldemort sets each new DE a particularly odious task to prove the DE's loyalty to himself above all? What better task for Regulus than to kill his blood-traitor brother, now an Order member? Carol: Draco, in contrast, knows what the DEs are all about and has no qualms about using an (admittedly thwarted) Unforgiveable Curse on Harry (HBP Sectumsempra chapter), whom he blames for his father's imprisonment: "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a whisper. 'I'm going to make you pay for what you've done to my father . . .'" (OoP 851, ellipsis and italics in original). IOW, Draco intends to get revenge on Harry, and it sounds to me as if he intends to do so by taking his father's place as a DE. Rather different than merely joining up to support the pureblood ideology, which Draco surely knows is only one component of DE life, which also involves not only the three Unforgiveable Curses but other forms of Dark magic (which Draco is under the delusion that "we" need no protection from, HBP 324). Debbie: While it's interesting that JKR draws a direct parallel between Regulus and Draco, I'm not sure there's much of a difference between Regulus' expectations and Draco's. Not because Draco was sheltered, but because the killings that took place in VWI must have been reported in the Daily Prophet. (Otherwise, why would the public have known or cared what Barty Crouch Sr. was doing about it as head of Magical Law Enforcement?) Regulus was even younger than Sirius, who was maybe 20 when Voldemort lost his powers. VW1 had been going on for 11 years by then. Surely Regulus was aware that the DEs killed to achieve their ends. It must have been something else that he refused to do. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 14 12:26:11 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 12:26:11 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152207 > Alla: > > Okay, midnight here, so I am going to post briefly before I go to > bed. > > How do you figure that the fact that Ginny remembered SOME things > equals her not being possessed at all? > > Isn't Riddle just easing his grip on her when diary was not with her > equally possible? Pippin: Not according to Ginny. "Are there big blank periods when you don't know what you've been up to?" Harry racked his brains. "No," he said. "Then You-Know-Who hasn't ever possessed you," said Ginny simply. "When he did it to me, I couldn't remember what I'd been doing for hours at a time. I'd find myself somewhere and not know how I got there." --OOP ch 23 No memory gaps=no possession. It's as plain as that. If Ginny thought that Voldemort could maintain a light grip on someone without their knowing it, she could hardly have been so reassuring. Alla: > In any event, we are definitely not going to agree on Ginny being > possessed all the time or not, Pippin: So no inconvenient canon fact will change your mind? That's, um, candid. :) Alla: but won't you at least agree that Ginny was WEAKENED > significantly by her struggles with Riddle at the rime she was > possessed. I mean, I am having trouble to imagine a scenario for at > least part of Riddle not being in her head all the time, but for the > sake of the argument let's say that I do. > > Woudn't you agree that Ginny was at least emotionally ill, tired , > upset in the brief period of time that she was not possessed and not > in the good state of mind to make any rational decisions? Pippin: Sure. Wouldn't you agree that Draco was in a similar state? His father was in jail, his family disgraced both in the eyes of the WW and in Voldemort's, he'd been subjected to occlumency lessons with Bella, and Harry was stalking him. And that's *before* Voldie started threatening his family. > > Alla, > > still scratching her head over Ginny being more liable than Draco. Pippin: Draco had been raised to think that Voldemort was a hero, that Dark Magic is cool, that people like Harry's parents and the Longbottoms were traitors who deserved what they got, and that Dumbledore was the worst thing that had ever happened to Hogwarts. Naturally he was pleased to take part in Voldemort's plans. He never thought that his friends would be in danger. Up until the tower, nothing had happened to make him seriously question the things he'd been brought up to believe. But a few words from Dumbledore, plus Fenrir in the raiding party, were enough to make him lower his wand. But Ginny knew the attacks were dreadful, she knew she had some responsibility, she knew her friends were in danger. She knew from the moment that she began to suspect she was involved in the attacks. In that sense, she's more to blame than Draco, though I'd agree that both of them were underage and not fully responsible for what they did. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 14 13:28:00 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:28:00 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0605140329o630e7172re155f86409b7e6e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152208 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, elfundeb wrote: > It doesn't appear that Draco needed to tell Voldemort his plan in order to > secure DEs as backup. The text suggests that he may have recruited his > assistants on his own, because if he had asked Voldemort, wouldn't Snape > have been aware of it? (At least if you take at face value, as I do, > Snape's statement that he was told about Draco's task before the UV.) He > tells Snape the evening of Slughorn's Christmas party that he had assistants > for his task, and better ones than Crabbe and Goyle. It's unclear who gave > the DEs their orders to let Draco take care of Dumbledore himself. Maybe, > since it was Draco's operation, those orders came from him. > Pippin: Draco wasn't in charge of his assistants or he would have known Fenrir was coming. Since Draco didn't go to Hogsmeade, someone else had to have put Rosmera under the Imperius curse. All this suggests that someone other than Draco was in charge of the operation. I'd guess the cabinets were part of the plan from the beginning. The first thing Draco does is ask Borgin for advice on how to fix the cabinet, and threaten him to make sure he doesn't sell the other one. The necklace and the mead are obtained later. It could be that Voldemort first ordered Draco to find a way to get DE's into Hogwarts, and when, to his astonishment, Draco produced one, he then involved Draco in the plot. Voldemort did not have Draco trained in killing, which shows that he never seriously expected Draco to kill. But getting the DE's into Hogwarts was obviously very important to him, and seems to me to have been aimed at getting Snape to burn his bridges. Pippin From kernsac at earthlink.net Sun May 14 06:20:09 2006 From: kernsac at earthlink.net (Peggy Kern) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 23:20:09 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape could have? References: <20060513233341.35289.qmail@web34107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <010701c6771e$746ccf10$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> No: HPFGUIDX 152209 Wendy Dupuy asked: I have a question. At the end of HBP after the "death" of Dumbledore, when Harry is chasing Snape, why then did Snape not kill him? If Harry had the chance he would have. Snape could have, why didn't he if he was truly on the Dark Lord's side? Peggy now: When one of the Death Eaters did try to kill Harry during the chase, Snape stopped him and said that Harry belonged to the Dark Lord. So it's possible that Snape was saving Harry for Voldemort. Then again, it's possible that Snape was protecting him because he's on the Order's side but wants to make it look like he's saving him for Voldemort. Guess we won't know until the end of the series. Peggy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 13:53:53 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:53:53 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152210 > > Alla: > > Isn't Riddle just easing his grip on her when diary was not with her > > equally possible? > > Pippin: > Not according to Ginny. > --OOP ch 23 > > No memory gaps=no possession. It's as plain as that. If Ginny thought > that Voldemort could maintain a light grip on someone without their > knowing it, she could hardly have been so reassuring. Alla: No memory gaps = no possession? Hmmm, I am afraid poor Ginny is NOT an expert on all the ways person could have been possessed, including herself. Just ask Harry if he has any trouble remembering anything that had happened to him while he was possessed at MOM? You DO agree that he was possessed? > Alla: > > In any event, we are definitely not going to agree on Ginny being > > possessed all the time or not, > > Pippin: > So no inconvenient canon fact will change your mind? That's, um, candid. > :) Alla: Oh, sure it can change my mind if I cannot find any other interpretation for those inconvenient facts. Then I will bow to you and say that this is a "stalemade" canon, right now I really can find the other interpretation. :) > Pippin: > Sure. Wouldn't you agree that Draco was in a similar state? His > father was in jail, his family disgraced both in the eyes of the > WW and in Voldemort's, he'd been subjected to occlumency > lessons with Bella, and Harry was stalking him. And that's > *before* Voldie started threatening his family. Alla: Hehe. Why did I know that you were going to say it? Voldemort was NOT in Draco's head prior to him making the decision, Voldemort WAS in Ginny's head at least prior to her stealing the diary. To me it makes all the difference in the world. But sure Draco was upset that his criminal father was in jail and wanted to avenge him, absolutely. Ginny did not sign up for murder, her mistake was to trust the book. Draco DID sign for murder. He deserves jail in my book, Ginny in my book deserved rest and healing and that is exactly where she went. IMO, Alla From puduhepa98 at aol.com Sun May 14 14:36:01 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 10:36:01 EDT Subject: JKR's Misleading the reader and DD Message-ID: <46d.2ab6d8.31989a51@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152211 >judtcarol167 wrote (in her fine thought provoking questions) > 4) We later learn that Madam Pince is not the only person > listening behind the shelves: Draco is there as well. JKR is > clearly misleading the reader with a false or incomplete > explanation. Can you think of any other "explanations" that may > be revealed as misleading in the future? > bboyminn: As to 'other' misleading explanation, I think it is safe to say that frequently in JKR's world things are not what they seem, and there will be plenty of stunning revelation in the next and final book. Nikkalmati: Yes, one of the fascinating elements of the series is JKR's concealing the things we need to know in plane sight with the clear purpose to deceive us. We then have the fun of these discussions. It can be hard to discern the red herrings. With this in mind I recall JKH in an interview proposed DD's family as a fruitful line of inquiry. What family? For someone who has lived 150 years he appears to have few connections; only Abe forth, his brother, is known to us. He has no descendents and we are told nothing about his lineage. On the other hand, he has connections to phoenixes, which are eternal creatures repeatedly dying and being reborn. I am not exactly proposing that DD is a phoenix (although that is possible), but what if he is also eternal in some way? He could be Griffendor himself (GG) or even Merlin. I was struck by the scene in the Mirror of Eresed where he says to Harry that if he were to look into the mirror he would see himself holding a pair of socks. He covers up by saying something like you can't have too many socks, but a gift of clothes (specifically socks in Dobby's case) is a sign of freedom. What if DD is caught in an unending cycle of reincarnation, he is tired of it and wishes someone would set him free? Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 14 15:27:49 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:27:49 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152212 > Alla: > > No memory gaps = no possession? Hmmm, I am afraid poor Ginny is NOT > an expert on all the ways person could have been possessed, > including herself. > > Just ask Harry if he has any trouble remembering anything that had > happened to him while he was possessed at MOM? You DO agree that he > was possessed? Pippin: Yes, he was possessed -- and horribly, dreadfully aware of it. Show me some canon that Voldemort can possess people, allow them to be aware of what they are doing, and yet not be aware that they are possessed. Alla: > Ginny did not sign up for murder, her mistake was to trust the book. > Draco DID sign for murder. He deserves jail in my book, Ginny in my > book deserved rest and healing and that is exactly where she went. > Pippin: I'm not talking about who should be punished. Punishment can be counterproductive -- it was Ginny's fear of punishment that kept her from trying to get help. You're saying Ginny's only mistake was to trust the book. I'm saying she made a further mistake in trying to cover up what was happening to her when she stopped trusting it. That *was* signing up for murder--she knew that the attacks were no joke. Like Draco, she was only fortunate that no one was killed. I think Dumbledore's mercy helped her to understand that she made a bad choice, just as it helped Draco to understand that his choices were wrong. Pippin From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun May 14 15:34:33 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:34:33 -0000 Subject: Snape could have? In-Reply-To: <45e.39ea0d.31981bdb@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152213 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at ... wrote: > > Julie: > > BTW, the more interesting question to me has always been why > didn't Snape allow the DE to crucio Harry, or better yet why didn't > Snape crucio Harry himself? If he's DDM the answer is obvious. > If he's ESE or OFH, it's not so obvious. I doubt LV cares if Harry > suffers a little pain, so long as he's not rendered insane. And > Snape hates Harry, with no deliberate exaggeration of that feeling > required or likely if he's ESE or OFH. He has no reason *not* to > enjoy a bit of torture on the bane of his existence these past > six miserable years at Hogwarts. > Tonks: Hummm . thinking again.. A scary and dangerous thing I know. ;-) If someone Crucioed Harry, would LV feel it? Probably not, I think the scar connection only happens from LV to Harry, but maybe ? Tonks_op From belviso at attglobal.net Sun May 14 15:40:40 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 11:40:40 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco References: Message-ID: <006701c6776c$c4e2a980$5760400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152214 Carol: > Do you see a different sequence of events, with Voldemort actively > recruiting Draco? Certainly LV assigned him the job of killing > Dumbledore ("It''s my job; he gave it to me"), but I'm not aware of > any canon evidence that the original contact between Voldemort and > Draco was Voldemort's idea. Draco was proud of his discovery and eager > to share it with LV, both for his own "glory" and revenge against > dumbledore and Harry. > > I can't see Voldemort coming to Draco, saying, "I have an assignment > for you: Murder Dumbledore," and Draco saying, "Oh, I have the perfect > way to do that. I'll fix the Vanishing Cabinet and create a passageway > between Hogwarts and Borgin and Burkes." At which point Voldemort > would either need to use Legilimency or require an explanation to know > what he was talking about. > > It must have been the other way around; Draco told LV about the > passageway and volunteered to fix the cabinet, after which Voldemort > gave him the additional assignment, or ultimatum, of killing > Dumbledore, with the DEs as back up. > > At least that's how the evidence reads to me. Magpie: I definitely see another sequence of events because what's described as not making sense is the whole plot of the book. Voldemort gives Draco an assignment to kill Dumbledore. It's the only assignment anyone ever talks about throughout the books. All the reasons this is ridiculous are brought up and dealt with in canon when we learn that Voldemort has not recruited Draco, really, he's just using him as a way to punish Lucius. The whole Draco involvement is a cruel joke on Voldemort's part. The Vanishing Cabinets are the thing that raise it to another level, and those were Draco's idea entirely. They are the thing Draco thinks will let him surprise everyone by actually succeeding. He may have told Voldemort about them immediately or told him later, but we never see any hint that Voldemort has any plan involving DEs in Hogwarts except killing DD. They are there to make sure DD gets killed, either by Draco or by Snape. We do have some reason to think that since Snape at least says "he wants me to do it in the end." But the bottom line is everyone agrees that Voldemort has given Draco an assignment to kill Dumbledore which is really a plan to get Draco killed to punish Lucius. We also know that Draco was a willing would-be DE. But the Cabinet plot is always linked to the murders. There's no evidence at all of Draco coming up with a plan to get DEs into Hogwarts for some other reason, presenting that to Voldemort and then having the killing added on as a surprise. I think that would have come out with everything else on the Tower if it was important to his story. The book's theme centers around killing and its effect on the soul. That's the task Draco is supposed to do, and if he doesn't others will be killed. That's what Snape has to do, and if he doesn't he'll be killed. Narcissa is trying to prevent Draco from being killed. Tom kills people to split his soul. Harry almost kills Draco. Draco almost kills two people. Harry's still mourning Sirius who has been killed. We've even got the return of Buckbeak who was not killed. JKR's going for very simple, straight lines to the heart of the matter. Overcomplicating, imo, dilutes the effect. It's like imagining that fixing the TWT was Barty Crouch's idea and then Voldemort surprised him by adding the twist of Portkey-ing Harry to him at the end, so if Barty hadn't gone to him with that plan none of this would have happened. Voldemort's not passive. He's the man with the plan. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 15:55:27 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:55:27 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152215 > > Alla: > > > > No memory gaps = no possession? Hmmm, I am afraid poor Ginny is NOT > > an expert on all the ways person could have been possessed, > > including herself. > > > > Just ask Harry if he has any trouble remembering anything that had > > happened to him while he was possessed at MOM? You DO agree that he > > was possessed? > > Pippin: > Yes, he was possessed -- and horribly, dreadfully aware of it. Show > me some canon that Voldemort can possess people, allow them to > be aware of what they are doing, and yet not be aware that they are > possessed. Alla: You argued that " no memory gaps equals no possession". Harry did NOT have memory blanks and he WAS possessed. What I am saying that the fact that Ginny remembers what happened does not preclude the possibility that Riddle was still in her head, just more quiet if it makes sense. Riddle was pouring the parts of himself in Ginny BEFORE she disposed of the diary. Are you saying that when she disposed of the diary Riddle took those parts of himself BACK? It does not make sense to me, sorry. > Pippin: > I'm not talking about who should be punished. Punishment can be > counterproductive -- it was Ginny's fear of punishment that kept > her from trying to get help. You're saying Ginny's only mistake was > to trust the book. I'm saying she made a further mistake in trying to > cover up what was happening to her when she stopped trusting it. Alla: Right, I understand that this is your POV. Pippin: > That *was* signing up for murder--she knew > that the attacks were no joke. Like Draco, she was only fortunate > that no one was killed. Alla: IMO, Pippin she was a zomby most of the time and when she was not full zomby, she was still carrying Tommy in her head, so if somebody WAS killed, I would not think that this was her fault at all. Pippin: I think Dumbledore's mercy helped her to > understand that she made a bad choice, just as it helped Draco to > understand that his choices were wrong. Alla: Well, here we disagree. I don't think she NEEDED mercy. I think she needed help. But sure Dumbledore showed mercy to Draco. Let's just hope it was not in vain. JMO, Alla From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun May 14 16:15:39 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 16:15:39 -0000 Subject: JKR's Misleading the reader and DD In-Reply-To: <46d.2ab6d8.31989a51@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152216 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, puduhepa98 at ... wrote: > With this in mind I recall JKH in an interview proposed DD's > family as a fruitful line of inquiry. What family? (Snip)> On the other hand, he has connections to phoenixes, which are eternal creatures repeatedly dying and being reborn. I am not exactly proposing that DD is a phoenix (although that is possible), but what if he is also eternal in some way? He could be Griffendor himself (GG) or even Merlin. I was struck by the scene in the Mirror of Eresed where he says to Harry that if he were to > look into the mirror he would see himself holding a pair of socks. He covers up by saying something like you can't have too many socks, but a gift of clothes (specifically socks in Dobby's case) is a sign of freedom. What if DD is caught in an unending cycle of reincarnation, he is tired of it and wishes someone would set him free? Tonks: My gosh you may be on to something here. In addition to everything else I think that DD symbolizes(Christ figure), I have often suggested that DD may be a Phoenix. I forgot the post number. Basically he has all of those names, and his arm was black.. burnt looking, perhaps approaching his burning time,etc. DD tells LV "There are worse things than death". Makes you think again about that phrase doesn't it? And the socks clue was there before the next book in which someone *is* freed by a sock. And what about Aberforth? How old can he be? Do phoenixes have any connection to goats? Any folklore that anyone knows about?? Or any folklore about humans and Phoenixes that might fit here? Tonks_op From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun May 14 16:27:15 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 16:27:15 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152217 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > That *was* signing up for murder--she knew > that the attacks were no joke. Like Draco, she was only fortunate > that no one was killed. I think Dumbledore's mercy helped her to > understand that she made a bad choice, just as it helped Draco to > understand that his choices were wrong. > > Pippin > First: Ginny was eleven, maybe twelve at the time. Draco was sixteen, and almost certainly had become seventeen, a legal adult during HBP. There is a big difference between an sixteen year old and an twelve year old in judging situations, seeing consequences, in short in maturity level. Ginny was a child, Draco a young adult. That alone makes Draco far more responsible than Ginny could ever be. Second: Tom Riddle's memory admits that when she was writing in the diary she poured her soul into it, and he took that soul and grew strong on it, stronger than Ginny. That was what he was doing with her in the chamber of secrets, getting the rest of her soul so she would die and he would live. Well, somebody who enchanted, who's soul is gradually being tapped, is not likely to be in a sound mind even if it is not a child. Sure, Ginny notices something fishy, she is an intelligent child and figured something was wrong. But I can easily see her keeping her mouth shut in the hope everything will go away, that there must be something else going on. Compare this to Draco, who has emotionally upset by his daddy being in prison and outed as a DE. Sure, that must have hurt a lot. Sure he must have been in an environment that was pro DE. Yet he is also a part of the larger wizarding world where lots of people are so very, very afraif of LV and his minions that it must have occured to him that these people think differently. His daddy is in prison because he did something illegal. His aunt was in prison because she tortured some people into insanity. Even if he completely condoned all that, he is old enough to comprehend that in the eyes of society it was criminal and that what he is charged to do is a terrible crime. Yet is is proud of it. Yes, he is under a lot of pressure, yet he is crying. But not because he is supposed to do something horrible, something against his conscience. But because he is not succeeding. And then he finds out there is a price to failure. Sure that changes his view and takes his mind of dreams of power and glory. But long before that he knew what he ought to have done: Gone to DD, confessed and asked for help. Yet he did not because he was honoured with his task. It is easier to understand that when he knows what is at stake for him he is afraid to get help. But he should have gone long before. Besides what is excusable in a child is far less excusable in an adult. Draco willingly took the criminal route. He embraced it. Ginny was a victim who was simply afraid. Gerry, baffled by the whole discussion From enlil65 at gmail.com Sun May 14 16:28:52 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 11:28:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape could have? In-Reply-To: References: <45e.39ea0d.31981bdb@aol.com> Message-ID: <1789c2360605140928n726345asab5b301e20085a2b@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152218 On 5/14/06, Tonks wrote: > > Julie: > > BTW, the more interesting question to me has always been why > > didn't Snape allow the DE to crucio Harry, or better yet why didn't > > Snape crucio Harry himself? > > Tonks: > If someone Crucioed Harry, would LV feel it? Probably not, I think > the scar connection only happens from LV to Harry, but maybe?? Peggy W: Voldemort himself Crucioed Harry in the GOF graveyard (end of chapter 33), and he didn't seem to suffer any from it. The narrative notes that Harry felt great pain in his scar in addition to the usual Crucio effects; I would guess that was from Voldemort's proximity and emotional arousal (the usual things). -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun May 14 16:50:10 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 16:50:10 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152219 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > Ron had every right. He's her older brother, and she was putting > herself into a position to earn those sort of nicknames. It was his > duty as the elder sibling to call her on her behavior. (And the > fight that came of it struck me as a very accurate depiction of > those sort of sibling fights. No one looks good in the middle of > such things.) ????? What behaviour? Having a couple of boyfriends at the appropriate age for discovering boys? One at the time, finishing one relation before having another. Nothing wrong or strange there. The only person who had issues was Ron himself, which had a lot more to do with him not being popular with the girls. Besides, the idea that elder brothers are somehow responsible and justified to control their younger sibblings behaviour is reprehensible. Reminds me of those honour killings we see now when sis has a non-muslim boyfriend. > > However, Ginny is *wrong* about Fleur, as we see at the end of HBP. > So this is yet another example of Ginny's anger not only being > directed at someone who does *not* deserve it, but also hurting > those she loves. Well, Fleur may truly love Bill but she was a a very annoying and condescending houseguest. Bill would not have needed help if Fleur had shown normal manners and a bit ogf politeness instead of being arrogant and condescending towards her future husband's family. This is not a family that is set against strangers. I'm sure they were fully prepared to love Fleur, yet Fleur is not really very lovable in what we see from her in the book. > Betsy Hp: > Actually, we don't. We know Ginny likes Luna. But where was > Ginny's anger of Justice when Luna's stuff was stolen? That's what > I meant about JKR not giving us a clear case of Ginny's "righteous" > anger. Does Ginny even know? Luna is a Ravenclaw and her things were stolen from her by her housemates. Ginny and Luna only become better aquinted after the MoM battle as I remember correctly. Before that she is just a girl in Ginny's herbology class. > Betsy Hp: > I do. And if either of my younger sisters had treated me as Ginny > treated Ron there'd have been sooo much hell to pay. Ron is a > better person than me, I guess. Well, if I would have had an older brother like Ron I would have treated him much worse than Ginny. He was awful, patriarchal, and behaving like he belonged in the Victorian age. He needed his commupance and needed it badly. And it was all over when he finally had his own girlfriend. We don't find Ron mentioning Ginny havin extensive snogging sessions in the common room, yet guess who does... > > > >>Nick: > > I hate to break it to everyone, but we're supposed to LIKE Ginny. > > We're supposed to laugh at her jokes. We're supposed to approve > > of her behavior. > > Betsy Hp: > Why? Because she is a very likable popular girl. > Betsy Hp: > Heh. I *was* that type of person for a while. Totally proud of my > temper, etc. I was also going through a pretty dark time (on top of > the usual "teenager" stuff) and fortunately worked my way through > it. And once my head was on a little straighter I realized that my > temper was actually a massive weakness and worked to change that > too. IOWs, I grew up. So I have no doubt Ginny can do the same. I > just hope she does. Because Harry deserves no less. Hm, I guess your view of Ginny is very different from what I read from the books. With respect, I don't think you were like Ginny. Because what you describe is not like Ginny at all. Gerry From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun May 14 16:53:32 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 16:53:32 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <006701c6776c$c4e2a980$5760400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152220 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > Carol: > > ...edited... > > > > It must have been the other way around; Draco told LV about > > thepassageway and volunteered to fix the cabinet, after which > > Voldemort gave him the additional assignment, or ultimatum, > > of killing Dumbledore, with the DEs as back up. > > > > At least that's how the evidence reads to me. > > > Magpie: > I definitely see another sequence of events ... Voldemort gives > Draco an assignment to kill Dumbledore. It's the only assignment > anyone ever talks about throughout the books. .... > > The Vanishing Cabinets are the thing that raise it to another > level, and those were Draco's idea entirely. They are the thing > Draco thinks will let him surprise everyone by actually > succeeding. He may have told Voldemort about them immediately > or told him later, but we never see any hint that Voldemort has > any plan involving DEs in Hogwarts except killing DD. > ... > > ...edited... There's no evidence at all of Draco coming up with > a plan to get DEs into Hogwarts for some other reason, presenting > that to Voldemort and then having the killing added on as a > surprise. I think that would have come out with everything else > on the Tower if it was important to his story. > > The book's theme centers around killing ...edited... Voldemort's > not passive. He's the man with the plan. > > -m bboyminn: You have an interesting take on this matter, Magpie, but I don't think I can agree. Of course, I can't say that you are wrong, only that I don't /think/ you are right. Of course, Voldemort wants to kill Dumbledore; always has, always will, but why hasn't he attempted or done it before? I say because a vast majority of the time Dumbledore is hold up in the heavily protected near impenitrable Hogwarts Castle. With no viable way to attack Dumbledore, he, Voldemort, has been unable to act. But Draco finds the loophole that Voldemort needs, he find a way to enter the Castle undetected. I suspect that Draco, eager to win favor and status with Voldemort, directly or indirectly, approached Voldemort with his knowledge of how to get into the Castle. While deep down, Draco knew this could lead to killings, I think he divorced himself from that idea. In otherwords, he was in denial about the consequences of bringing this information to Voldemort. Like all inpulsive shortsighted teens, Draco was not willing to look past the short-term events and see the consequences of his actions. Voldemort, being the evil, vindictive, spiteful, generally deranged person that he is, compounded Draco's proposed task to a level that Draco never imagined by telling him that Draco himself would personally kill Dumbledore. I'm sure he presented this to Draco as quite a treat. Now Draco can't deal with potential deaths in the abstract and romantic way he had always viewed being a Death Eater. Now 'death' is dropped on Draco like a bolt of lightening from the sky. It could have been at that time, though I suspect it came later when Draco started to falter, that Voldemort compounded the pressure on Draco by pointing out that he doesn't tolerate failure, and that if Draco fails, it's not only his death at stake, but the death of his family. I really can't see Voldemort initially telling Draco to kill Dumbledore, then later Draco comes up with a plan. Why would he do that? He couldn't possibly expect Draco to accomplish such an impossible task. So, once again, I say that Voldemort has always wanted to kill Dumbledore, but he has never acted because he never felt he had an effective plan. Draco provides the seed from which Voldemort's plan grows. In my view, it seems too irrational and pointless to start the plan by initially telling Draco to kill Dumbledore. That is a plan with no hope of success. Voldemort could just as easily picked someone at random and told them to kill Dumbledore, but Dumbledore is not an easy man to kill. All Voldemort would do with a plan like that is waste his DE's like so much cannon fodder; waste the precious few DE's that he has. It's pointless. Draco 'gateway' into the Castle has to be, in my opinion, the seed that starts a plan to get Dumbledore. You are right, there is an element of vengence in Voldemort's plan. Voldemort is using Draco as a way of punishing Draco, and tormenting Draco's parent. But Voldemort also knows that if only the first part of Draco's plan works, Voldemort will still have DE's as well as Snape in the Castle. If they have Dumbledore in a vulnerable position then any of them can perform the coup de gr?ce. So, Voldemort really only needs Draco to half succeed in order for his plan to succeed. Further, if the opportunity is there to kill Dumbledore, I think Voldemort can afford to lose Snape as a spy. Reasonably with Dumbledore gone the Resistance will fall apart. So, while you do raise some interesting and valid points, it makes, to my mind, far more sense to start with entrances into the castle and build from there, rather than start with the wholly impossible task of killing Dumbledore, and proceed from there. Of course, that's just one man's opinion, but it make much greater sense to me. bboyminn From aida_costa at hotmail.com Sun May 14 06:47:11 2006 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (nowheregirrrl) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 06:47:11 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152221 Does anyone else find the Victor/Hermione pairing in GoF weird? I have two problems with this: 1. Ron and Harry don't question Krum's motives in asking Hermione to the yuleball. After all, he attends Durmstrang (known to teach the Dark Arts), the Durmstrang students dine with the Slytherins (who through the Harry filter are all presumed to be muggleborn-haters) and Hermione is muggleborn. As I remember it in school, 'going out' with someone would be the beginning of some major discussions and analyzing of feelings, and not just among girls. Granted, Ron and Harry are definetly clueless at times, but they are very protective of her and the three of them do hang out and talk A LOT. Shouldn't they have been suspicious that Victor would be a 'mudblood' hater and was using her or maybe setting a trap for her with regards to Malfoy? The two boys are constantly paranoid about Malfoy! 2. And what of Victor? He publicly allies himself with a muggleborn even though he attends Durmstrang (which in hindsight we know has a Death Eater as Headmaster!) and while at Hogwarts is spending time with known muggleborn-haters in Slytherin. Is he purposely showing himself to be 'muggleborn-friendly'? Or is having a muggleborn friend a novelty because only purebloods are allowed to attend Durmstrang? He seems to be genuinely fond of her (from what we see through the Harry filter)and we know she still writes to him after GoF, so is this a plot device so JKR can bring Victor back for the last book? So my question is this: Is the lack of discussion between HG/RW/HP regarding Victor an oversight by JKR? Or am I missing something here? nowheregirrrl From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 16:52:30 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 16:52:30 -0000 Subject: Draco and Voldemort (was Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: <006701c6776c$c4e2a980$5760400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152222 > Carol: > > Do you see a different sequence of events, with Voldemort actively > > recruiting Draco? Nick: Remember in Spinner's End when Narcissa says that this is revenge for Lucius's mistake (a fact that Snape does not deny)? It would appear as though Draco's agency in this little affair/arrangement is slim to none. Voldemort wants Draco offed to punish Lucius, and he attempts to accomplish this by setting an impossible task. Nick From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 17:33:46 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 17:33:46 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <006701c6776c$c4e2a980$5760400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152223 Carol earlier: > > Do you see a different sequence of events, with Voldemort actively recruiting Draco? Certainly LV assigned him the job of killing Dumbledore ("It''s my job; he gave it to me"), but I'm not aware of any canon evidence that the original contact between Voldemort and Draco was Voldemort's idea. Draco was proud of his discovery and eager to share it with LV, both for his own "glory" and revenge against dumbledore and Harry. > > > > I can't see Voldemort coming to Draco, saying, "I have an assignment for you: Murder Dumbledore," and Draco saying, "Oh, I have the perfect way to do that. I'll fix the Vanishing Cabinet and create a passageway between Hogwarts and Borgin and Burkes." At which point Voldemort would either need to use Legilimency or require an explanation to know what he was talking about. > > > > It must have been the other way around; Draco told LV about the > > passageway and volunteered to fix the cabinet, after which Voldemort gave him the additional assignment, or ultimatum, of killing Dumbledore, with the DEs as back up. > > > > At least that's how the evidence reads to me. > > > Magpie: > I definitely see another sequence of events because what's described as not making sense is the whole plot of the book. Voldemort gives Draco an assignment to kill Dumbledore. It's the only assignment anyone ever talks about throughout the books. > > The Vanishing Cabinets are the thing that raise it to another level, and those were Draco's idea entirely. They are the thing Draco thinks will let him surprise everyone by actually succeeding. He may have told Voldemort about them immediately or told him later, but we never see any hint that Voldemort has any plan involving DEs in Hogwarts except killing DD. They are there to make sure DD gets killed, either by Draco or by Snape. We do have some reason to think that since Snape at least says "he wants me to do it in the end." > > But the bottom line is everyone agrees that Voldemort has given Draco an assignment to kill Dumbledore which is really a plan to get Draco killed to punish Lucius. We also know that Draco was a willing would-be DE. But the Cabinet plot is always linked to the murders. There's no evidence at all of Draco coming up with a plan to get DEs into Hogwarts for some other reason, presenting that to Voldemort and then having the killing added on as a surprise. I think that would have come out with everything else on the Tower if it was important to his story. > Carol responds: So you think that Draco went to Voldemort to join up without telling him about the Vanishing Cabinets and Voldemort then assigned him to kill Dumbledore without knowing there was a way to get the DEs in as backup to make sure that Draco (or Snape) did the job? That makes no sense to me, no more than having Voldemort recruit Draco. Almost certainly Draco volunteered for the job of DE and volunteered to fix the cabinets at the same time. He was angry and wanted revenge, as he tells Harry in OoP, and he's figured out how the Vanishing Cabinets work. That seems like the perfect reason to go to Voldemort. Voldemort would then see an opportunity to punish Lucius Malfoy by adding a new component to Draco's plan: kill Dumbledore. Once Draco began to fear that he couldn't fix the Vanishing Cabinet and Voldemort began threatening him--kill Dumbledore or else--he resorted to desperate measures like the cursed necklace and the poisoned mead. But the Vanishing Cabinets were part of the plan from the beginning, as shown by "Draco's Detour," and not only Borgin but certain DEs--and therefore Voldemort--must have known about it. (Snape did not; I agree with Pippin that Voldemort was planning to trap him into killing DD or dying, and therefore he couldn't know that Draco had found a chink in Hogwarts' armor). The DEs didn't just arrive out of the blue. IMO, they were part of the plan all along--part of what Draco envisioned even before he knew the use to which his plan would be put, an assignment to kill Dumbledore. On a sidenote, Draco threatens Borgin with a visit from Fenirir Grayback, a "family friend." While I doubt that the Malfoys would let Fenrir anywhere near their manor, I wonder if Draco was really surprised when Fenrir showed up as one of the group of back-up DEs. Clearly he was working with someone, perhaps the "brutal-faced Death Eater" (whom I think must be Yaxley)? At least we agree that the fixing Vanishing Cabinet was Draco's idea, but I think he went to Voldemort with that idea and Voldemort then gave him the assignment of using killing Dumbledore, promising him DEs as backup if he fixed the Vanishing Cabinet. You still haven't answered my question of whether 1) Voldemort recruited Draco, gave him the seemingly impossible assignment of killing DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I have just the way!" or, 2) Draco went to him with *no* plan, Voldemort assigned him to kill DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I have just the way!" or 3) Draco went to LV *with* a plan, which Voldemort then converted to his own use, reocognizing it as a perfect opportunity to make sure that DD was killed if the plan succeeded, but also indicating that he wanted DD dead regardless. I really don't see alternatives 1) or 2) as remotely feasible. BTW, you apparently misunderstand me. I never suggested that there was any plan to bring DEs into Hogwarts for any purpose other than killing DD. I think that Draco proposed his idea and Voldemort immediately assigned Draco to kill Dumbledore, with the Vanishing Cabinet plan as the means of doing so--which is why completing that assignment was so important to Draco. I'm not disagreeing that Voldemort intended the plan to fail because he wanted to punish Lucius. Nor did I ever suggest that Voldemort was "passive." I'm only talking about chronology here. To repeat: I think that Draco came up with the Vanishing Cabinet idea, including the idea of fixing it himself, presented it to LV when he went to join the Death Eaters, and Voldemort added a further, unexpected, component to the plan: the order or ultimatum to kill Dumbledore once the DEs got into the castle (or by some other means if Draco couldn't fix the cabinet). *Of course* Voldemort expected Draco to fail to kill Dumbledore once the DEs got in, but LV wanted it both ways: dead Dumbledore and dead Draco, punished with death for his failure. So I agree with most of your points. It's the idea that Draco didn't tell Voldemort about the Vanishing Cabinets that leaves me mystified. And I don't understand why you think Draco went to Voldemort at all if it wasn't 1) to join up and 2) to present his bright idea of fixing the cabinet, creating a passageway between Hogwarts and B&B so the DEs could get in, and (ultimately) to be rewarded for this great service to the Dark Lord. Carol, who is *not* disputing what you call the "bottom line" and does not see how it relates to the chronology argument From belviso at attglobal.net Sun May 14 17:44:13 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:44:13 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco References: Message-ID: <00bc01c6777e$06be7e90$5760400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152224 bboyminn: I really can't see Voldemort initially telling Draco to kill Dumbledore, then later Draco comes up with a plan. Why would he do that? He couldn't possibly expect Draco to accomplish such an impossible task. Magpie: Voldemort doesn't expect Draco to accomplish such an impossible task. That is exactly what we're told in canon, the plot of the book revolves around this set up. Draco is supposed to fail and die in the attempt. Voldemort's plan is not for Draco to kill Dumbledore but for Lucius to be punished when his son is killed trying to do something he in no way is going to be able to do. bboyminn: So, once again, I say that Voldemort has always wanted to kill Dumbledore, but he has never acted because he never felt he had an effective plan. Draco provides the seed from which Voldemort's plan grows. Magpie: Dumbledore is killed by Snape who needs no Cabinets to get into Hogwarts. Getting people into Hogwarts has never been the thing standing between killing Dumbledore or not. Draco feels, and perhaps others feel, that if Draco would be able to kill Dumbledore he would need backup, but Snape doesn't necessarily have that issue. The DEs don't kill Dumbledore at all. bboyminn In my view, it seems too irrational and pointless to start the plan by initially telling Draco to kill Dumbledore. That is a plan with no hope of success.You are right, there is an element of vengence in Voldemort's plan. Magpie: Which is exactly what the plan is supposed to be, as we are told in canon. It is not supposed to be a success. Voldemort's plan is for Draco to die, not for Dumbledore to die at the hand of Draco. There is not "an element" of vengeance, the plan is about vengeance. bboyminn: But Voldemort also knows that if only the first part of Draco's plan works, Voldemort will still have DE's as well as Snape in the Castle. If they have Dumbledore in a vulnerable position then any of them can perform the coup de grce. So, Voldemort really only needs Draco to half succeed in order for his plan to succeed. Magpie: No, he needs to have the DEs there for *your* plan to succeed. Voldemort's plan, as told to us by a number of people in canon, is to punish Lucius Malfoy by setting up his son to be killed. His son, of course, has his own ideas about surprising everyone and succeeding. The only person we ever hear as someone Voldemort potentially wants to murder Dumbledore is Snape, who is already in the castle. bboyminn: So, while you do raise some interesting and valid points, it makes, to my mind, far more sense to start with entrances into the castle and build from there, rather than start with the wholly impossible task of killing Dumbledore, and proceed from there. Magpie: But that's because you are forming your own plan that goes against canon, and expecting Voldemort to follow reader logic is always tricky at best. Dumbledore's winding up dead does not mean that that was the point of Voldemort's plan. On the contrary, canon immediately loads that action with competing motivations of different people. -m From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun May 14 17:52:47 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 17:52:47 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152225 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > Draco wasn't in charge of his assistants or he would have known Fenrir > was coming. Since Draco didn't go to Hogsmeade, someone else had to > have put Rosmera under the Imperius curse. All this suggests that someone > other than Draco was in charge of the operation. With the first I agree, but Draco already had Rosmerta under Imperius. He did it the Hogsmeath weekend when he let her give the cursed necklace to Katy. He kept her under Imperius and by enchanted coin made her tell him when DD was away. Draco admitted that at the towe scene. > Voldemort did not have Draco trained in killing, which shows that he > never seriously expected Draco to kill. But getting the DE's into Hogwarts > was obviously very important to him, and seems to me to have been > aimed at getting Snape to burn his bridges. Interesting thought. But why would he want to dot that? From what the DE's say at the tower scene they all expect Draco to do the deed. They clearly have been instructed to do so. When he does not, they have a problem. But why would LV want to make Snape burn his bridges? He is still useful as a spy in a dissaranged OoP. I fully agree that he never expected Draco to come this far, but I don't think LV is somebody who expects people need to learn how to kill. After all it was something he never had any trouble with. Gerry From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 18:07:57 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 18:07:57 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152226 Pippin wrote: > > That *was* signing up for murder--she knew that the attacks were no joke. Like Draco, she was only fortunate that no one was killed. > Alla responded: > > IMO, Pippin she was a zomby most of the time and when she was not full zomby, she was still carrying Tommy in her head, so if somebody WAS killed, I would not think that this was her fault at all. > > > Pippin: > > I think Dumbledore's mercy helped her to understand that she made a bad choice, just as it helped Draco to understand that his choices were wrong. > > Alla: > > Well, here we disagree. I don't think she NEEDED mercy. I think she needed help. But sure Dumbledore showed mercy to Draco. Let's just hope it was not in vain. Carol responds: Isn't it possible that you're both right: Pippin in saying that she wasn't possessed when she stole back the diary, that doing so was a mistake, and that Ginny (like Draco) was lucky that no one was killed, and Alla in saying that Ginny wasn't "signing up for murder" by stealing back the diary and that she deserves mercy (at least as much as Draco)? IMO, Ginny isn't responsible for anything she did when she was actually possessed, but she *is* responsible for taking back the diary. But Alla is right that her age, twelve at most (I've forgotten when her birthday is) or possibly still eleven, must be considered in any judgment we pass on her. She was, above all, a frightened little girl who knew that she was involved in something terrible and was afraid of being punished or being thought wicked or bringing disgrace on her family or all of these things. IMO, when she stole back the diary, it wasn't to write in it again, in which case she *would* be "signing up for murder," but to keep Harry from finding out what she had done. Of course it was wrong to steal back the diary, to invade Harry's privacy by rummaging through his trunk and possibly damaging his property, and, above all, to cover up what she had done. But she was a little girl, not a near-adult like Draco (who knew from the beginning that he was "signing up for murder"), and she was both ashamed of what she had done and afraid of what people would think. How many people, especially children of that age, would have behaved differently? Of course it was wrong to do what she did, but it was a mistake, not a crime, a mistake for which she doesn't need the excuse of still being partly possessed. Part of growing up is acknowledging and learning from our mistakes, not finding excuses for them. And all of the characters in the book make mistakes, sometimes very big ones. Judge not that ye be not judged. We all make mistakes because we're all human, and our mistakes should not be held against us. Or that's what I think Dumbledore, the great believer in second chances, would think in this situation. And I think that's what JKR believes as well. JMO, as Alla says. Carol, with apologies for answering a question addressed to Pippin but hoping to present a middle ground From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun May 14 18:08:59 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 18:08:59 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <00bc01c6777e$06be7e90$5760400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152227 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > Magpie: > Which is exactly what the plan is supposed to be, as we are told in canon. > It is not supposed to be a success. Voldemort's plan is for Draco to die, > not for Dumbledore to die at the hand of Draco. There is not "an element" > of vengeance, the plan is about vengeance. Gerry Are we told that? Or is that Narcissa who is desperate for her little boy? Does Narcissa even know that Draco has found a way into Hogwarts? I don't have that impression because I think it would have come up in the conversation at Spinner's End. So maybe we are all supposed to think this is about LV revenging himself on Lucius. But what if in all these years this is the first time LV can get somebody totally unsuspected in DD's proximity for a prolonged time? This is the first time he has a schoolboy Death Eater. That gives opportunities he never had before. Combined with the vanishing cabinet I'm sure LV sees these opportunities. And likes them a lot. There were other DE's involved in the MoM fiasco, remember. Is he going to take revenge on all their families? That is one sure way for creating a huge risk that one of them will defect to protect them. Now he is vengeful, but I don't believe he is stupid. Gerry From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun May 14 18:39:12 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 18:39:12 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152228 "nowheregirrrl" > > Does anyone else find the Victor/Hermione pairing in GoF weird? I > have two problems with this: > > 1. Shouldn't they have been suspicious that > Victor would be a 'mudblood' hater and was using her or maybe setting > a trap for her with regards to Malfoy? The two boys are constantly > paranoid about Malfoy! > > 2. And what of Victor? He publicly allies himself with a muggleborn > even though he attends Durmstrang (which in hindsight we know has a > Death Eater as Headmaster!) and while at Hogwarts is spending time > with known muggleborn-haters in Slytherin. Is he purposely showing > himself to be 'muggleborn-friendly'? Or is having a muggleborn friend > a novelty because only purebloods are allowed to attend Durmstrang? Potioncat: Just as some of the students at Hogwarts do not agree with the policies of teaching DADA rather than Dark Arts nor with admitting Muggleborns, it appears not everyone at Durmstrang agrees with teaching Dark Arts or not admitting Muggleborns. I have no idea of Krum's opinion of teaching Dark Arts, but he seems to accept Hermione. As to the Dark Arts, many list members think the Unforgivables would be taught at Drumstrang as a matter of course. I don't think that's a given. The students, as a group, ate at the Slytherin table. We aren't told if there were other contacts. We know that not all Slytherins are so biased in their beliefs as the Malfoys and Blacks. nowheregirrrl: > So my question is this: Is the lack of discussion between HG/RW/HP > regarding Victor an oversight by JKR? Or am I missing something here? Potioncat: The issue was getting a date for the dance. There doesn't seem to have been any other dates between Hermione and Krum...or did I miss something? And Hermione often keeps secrets from the boys. I think she chose to keep this one for her own reasons. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun May 14 18:49:55 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 18:49:55 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152229 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "festuco" wrote: > > With the first I agree, but Draco already had Rosmerta under Imperius. > He did it the Hogsmeath weekend when he let her give the cursed > necklace to Katy. He kept her under Imperius and by enchanted coin > made her tell him when DD was away. Draco admitted that at the towe scene. Hickengruendler: But he wasn't in Hogsmeade that weekend. He was doing detentions with McGonagall. McGonagall said it once Harry told her about his suspicion that Draco planted the cursed object for Katie to find. Therefore if it wa shim personally, who put Rosmerta under the Imperius Curse, it must have been earlier. My guess is, that another Death Eater did it with Draco's knowledge. Maybe Draco got himself in detention to have an alibi. From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sun May 14 18:59:36 2006 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 18:59:36 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152230 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mandorino222" wrote: > > Look at all this hate for Ginny! Do I hear someone calling my name? I believe I do. In my view, Ginny only takes out her > anger on people who deserve it. Oh, well that makes it okay then. 'Cause what we want to encourage is more teenagers taken things into their own hands and showing no consequences or punishments as a result of their actions. Ron had no business telling her off > and (stopping just short of) calling her a slut. IIRC, he didn't call her a slut or stop short of doing so. He asked her if she wanted other people thinking she was which is a whole different beast. I went to high school with my younger sister, and you bet your behind I watched out for her. No one knows better than a teenage brother what boys want to do to their nubile teenage sister. If Ginny had been my sister... Zacharias Smith had > no business questioning her inclusion on the team and calling it > favoritism. Pesky opinions you aren't allowed to have. Regardless of whether he was right or wrong, he is allowed to have an opinion and not be assaulted for it. And for me, my problem with the scene isn't so much that it happens, but that we are supposed to like it and see it as something cool and spunky instead of the bullyish action it actually was--the second piece of bullying we saw directed at Zack Smith by Ginny. I think a lot of scenes with Ginny are that way; heavy handed attempts at getting the audience to like her, only for me at least, she doesn't come off as likeable. Which is sort of a problem when its harry's love interest in the story. Also let's not forget the haughty disdainful Fleur of GOF > in deciding whether the chicken of Ginny's dislike came before the egg > of Fleur's attitude. Yes, it can't possibly be petty jealousy over a preturnaturally beautiful woman going at her big brother and stealing him away from the only girl of the family. Ginny doesn't have nasty feelings like that. She is above those sorts of things. honestly the most insulting thing about Fleur/Ginny bit is that once again we are supposed to see the Phlegm nickname as funny. And it isn't. Its stupid. The twins are funny. Ron is funny. Harry is funny. Dumbledore is funny. Luna is funny. JKR can write funny. Ginny is not funny. Additionally, we know for a fact that she sticks > up for Luna. We know that Luna says that. We also never see it happen. We do however see Ginny call Luna Loony when she isn't around. The only people we see stick up for Luna is Harry and Ron. Once again, Ginny is all talk and no follow through--a repeating problem in HBP and OOTP. We hear litanies about Ginnys power and mastery of cursing but we never see either in action and she is in fact dropped pretty fast during the minstry action. We hear about how funny she is and she does nothing that makes me laugh in the entire book. We hear how she is a great friend to Luna and we don't see a single example of that. Ginny, and by extension, JKR, who is always talking her up, is trying way too hard. We don't need any interviews telling us how fantasic a wizard DD is. He oozes his might in every scene, from the quiet to the comical to the battles. We shouldn't have to get interviews explaining why she is so powerful and perfect for Harry. It should be obvious on the page. And it isn't. And for a not insignificant part of the fandom, Ginny isn't even all that likeable--let alone Harry's equal. She's an instrument of Justice; if you mess with Ginny, > you reap what you sow. How many instances in the book can you name where we saw Ginny stick up for the little guy, or fought a bad guy to protect someone weaker than herself? Not heard about second hand from a character or through an authors interview, but actually saw it in the books? I can think of exactly one in six books. Harry has more instrument of Justice in an eyelash than Ginny has ever displayed. She's too busy being petty and mean. > As for making fun of Ron, he's her BROTHER. Do any of you have > siblings? Yes, and if my sister had used the ammo on me that Ginny used on Ron, I would have done far worse than he does. Ginny was LOW in that scene. > I hate to break it to everyone, but we're supposed to LIKE Ginny. > We're supposed to laugh at her jokes. We're supposed to approve of > her behavior. I agree, we are supposed to. But I don't. And so don't a lot of other people. That's a problem. >I, for one, think she's hilarious, ballsy, vivacious, > and probably extremely hot. Harry deserves no less. Harry does deserve no less. Which is why I don't want to subject him to Ginny. > Do y'all have bad experiences with these types of people? I love those kind of people. I'm marrying that kind of person. Ginny is not that person. She is a bad caricature of that kind of person. phoenixgod2000, summoned through the sheer power of Ginny hate From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun May 14 19:05:08 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 19:05:08 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152231 > Carol: > IMO, when she [Ginny] stole back the diary, it wasn't to write in it again, in > which case she *would* be "signing up for murder," but to keep Harry > from finding out what she had done. Hickengruendler: I agree with you 100%, but there's one problem. She did write in it again. Tom mentioned how disappointed he was, when he recognized it was her, while he wanted to find out more about Harry. She didn't simply steal it, which is actually something I understand very much. Even ignoring the fact that Harry would learn her secrets through the diary, there is also the possibility that she might have feared that the diary would do to Harry, what it did to her. Therefore I can understand her actions here very much, (even if she didn't have the later reason I can). But what I cannot understand is, why she wrote in it again, instead of simply destroying the diary for good this time. IMO, even her youth doesn't explain this. I do not really blame her for what happens. IMO only Tom and Lucius are to blame. But I find it impossible to understand her motivations, and I do not think, that the book necessary offers the explanation, that she was still possessed at this time. If she were, than surely her motivations to steal back the diary would be to committ further attacks (seeing that in this theory Tom has the control) and not to prevent Harry finding out her secrets. Also, Tom didn't want Ginny to get the diary back. He wanted to find out more about Harry and why he survived the GH's attack and therefore was pleased when the diary was in Harry's possession. Therefore he did not have any motive to make Ginny steal the diary. From belviso at attglobal.net Sun May 14 19:16:05 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:16:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) References: Message-ID: <00f201c6778a$d99e72f0$5760400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152232 > Carol responds: > So you think that Draco went to Voldemort to join up without telling > him about the Vanishing Cabinets and Voldemort then assigned him to > kill Dumbledore without knowing there was a way to get the DEs in as > backup to make sure that Draco (or Snape) did the job? Magpie: Why not? That's exactly what we're told in the book, that Voldemort gives Draco an assignment to kill Dumbledore that he can't possibly accomplish because he wants to punish Lucius Malfoy. Draco's having backup is not necessary for that. Carol: > > That makes no sense to me, no more than having Voldemort recruit > Draco. Magpie: It makes no sense to me that Voldemort put the Tri Wizard Tournament between Harry and the Portkey he needed him to touch, but that's what happened in canon. Voldemort wants to punish Lucius Malfoy and Draco, as his son, is a way to punish him. No one ever suggests at any point in canon that Voldemort has recruited Draco because he's got any value to him as a DE or that the Cabinet plan was the thing that captured his interest. Carol: Almost certainly Draco volunteered for the job of DE and > volunteered to fix the cabinets at the same time. He was angry and > wanted revenge, as he tells Harry in OoP, and he's figured out how the > Vanishing Cabinets work. That seems like the perfect reason to go to > Voldemort. Voldemort would then see an opportunity to punish Lucius > Malfoy by adding a new component to Draco's plan: kill Dumbledore. Magpie: We don't know how Draco and Voldemort first got into contact with each other. We know Draco was eager to do something for Voldemort, we know Voldemort wanted to punish Lucius Malfoy and saw getting Draco killed through an impossible task as being a good way to do it. That's the information we have in canon connected to Draco's initially getting the assignment. It's never really suggested something else is needed on Draco's part to convince Voldemort to use him, so I don't think the lack of another reason supports the idea it was the Cabinets. Carol: > > Once Draco began to fear that he couldn't fix the Vanishing Cabinet > and Voldemort began threatening him--kill Dumbledore or else--he > resorted to desperate measures like the cursed necklace and the > poisoned mead. But the Vanishing Cabinets were part of the plan from > the beginning, as shown by "Draco's Detour," and not only Borgin but > certain DEs--and therefore Voldemort--must have known about it. Magpie: They were part of Draco's plan from the beginning absolutely, but we don't know how many people knew that when. Voldemort and some DEs certainly could have known about the Cabinet plot very early on, but that says nothing whatsoever about whether Draco came up with a plot to get DEs into Hogwarts and brought it to Voldemort only to have Voldemort say yes, great idea--oh and that just gives me the idea to avenge myself on your father while you're at it. Kill Dumbledore. The only thing we ever hear about how Draco got the assignment was related to Lucius' mistakes. Carol: (Snape > did not; I agree with Pippin that Voldemort was planning to trap him > into killing DD or dying, and therefore he couldn't know that Draco > had found a chink in Hogwarts' armor). Magpie: So did Snape not know about the Cabinet because Voldemort ordered Draco to not tell him? I think we lose some of the character stuff that way. Carol: > > The DEs didn't just arrive out of the blue. IMO, they were part of the > plan all along--part of what Draco envisioned even before he knew the > use to which his plan would be put, an assignment to kill Dumbledore. Magpie: The DEs did not just arrive out of the blue, no. They were part of the plan all along, yes--we see that in Draco's Detour. That they were part of a plan Draco envisioned and brought to Voldemort to get DEs into the castle which then led to Voldemort tacking on the idea of Draco killing Dumbledore is the part that's not in canon and I think should be if it's true. Carol: > On a sidenote, Draco threatens Borgin with a visit from Fenirir > Grayback, a "family friend." While I doubt that the Malfoys would let > Fenrir anywhere near their manor, I wonder if Draco was really > surprised when Fenrir showed up as one of the group of back-up DEs. Magpie: So that moment isn't really as simple or dramatic moment as it seems either. Carol: > At least we agree that the fixing Vanishing Cabinet was Draco's idea, Magpie: Yes, we're told that in canon. Carol: > You still haven't answered my question of whether 1) Voldemort > recruited Draco, gave him the seemingly impossible assignment of > killing DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I have just the way!" > or, 2) Draco went to him with *no* plan, Voldemort assigned him to > kill DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I have just the way!" or > 3) Draco went to LV *with* a plan, which Voldemort then converted to > his own use, reocognizing it as a perfect opportunity to make sure > that DD was killed if the plan succeeded, but also indicating that he > wanted DD dead regardless. > > I really don't see alternatives 1) or 2) as remotely feasible. Magpie: Nevertheless 1) / 2) is what we are told in canon. 3) is not. No one in canon questions the feasibility of 1/2. Draco's worth as a DE is openly questioned, and that question answered by the fact that Voldemort is planning for him to die to punish his father. I think if the Cabinets came into it that conclusion would be there in the books. Carol: > I'm not disagreeing that Voldemort intended the plan to fail because > he wanted to punish Lucius. Nor did I ever suggest that Voldemort was > "passive." I'm only talking about chronology here. Magpie: Okay, but your chronology involves coming up with stuff no where mentioned in canon. If the whole story of HBP starts this way it would be important for Draco's arc for us to know that and we don't. If we are told it in the next book I will certainly believe it, but I can't see any way to write it into this book. The idea that Draco realized he could get people into Hogwarts and went to Voldemort with the idea, thus sending Voldemort's wheels turning on a plot to get Snape in a Tower with a bunch of DEs and feeling he has to kill Voldemort can be made to fit canon, but I don't see a single independent reference to it anywhere. It starts with events as they happened and then fits that idea onto it. Carol: > So I agree with most of your points. It's the idea that Draco didn't > tell Voldemort about the Vanishing Cabinets that leaves me mystified. Magpie: I don't think Draco didn't tell Voldemort about the Cabinets ever. I just see no reason that Draco's telling him about the Cabinets had to be the thing to set the plot in motion. He could tell him at any time. Carol: > And I don't understand why you think Draco went to Voldemort at all if > it wasn't 1) to join up and 2) to present his bright idea of fixing > the cabinet, creating a passageway between Hogwarts and B&B so the DEs > could get in, and (ultimately) to be rewarded for this great service > to the Dark Lord. Magpie: I do agree that Draco wanted to join up. We don't know what "going to Voldemort" entailed for him since Draco is already connected to DEs. He wouldn't necessarily need to floo to Voldemort in the middle of the night and present himself for service. He might have done that, or he might have been thrilled to get a call from Voldemort and brought to see him, since Voldemort is already well aware he exists. The important thing for HBP is that Voldemort's eye has fallen on him. Draco himself is eager to do Voldemort's bidding. There's no indication that Draco had to bring anything to the table except that to get the assignment. The thing Draco has that the book says is important to Voldemort is that he's Lucius Malfoy's son. That he has figured out a way to get DEs into Hogwarts is important to the plot too, but it's never suggested as the thing that's gotten him the assignment or brought him to Voldemort's attention. > Magpie: > Which is exactly what the plan is supposed to be, as we are told in canon. > It is not supposed to be a success. Voldemort's plan is for Draco to die, > not for Dumbledore to die at the hand of Draco. There is not "an element" > of vengeance, the plan is about vengeance. Gerry Are we told that? Magpie: Yeah, we are. It's the only explanation we're ever given. No, Narcissa doesn't know Draco's come up with a way into Hogwarts. Gerry: So maybe we are all supposed to think this is about LV revenging himself on Lucius. But what if in all these years this is the first time LV can get somebody totally unsuspected in DD's proximity for a prolonged time? This is the first time he has a schoolboy Death Eater. That gives opportunities he never had before. Combined with the vanishing cabinet I'm sure LV sees these opportunities. And likes them a lot. Magpie: Again, this is the way with theories that involve the reader making a lot of stuff up. However much we like them, they effectively unwrite the book we just read so we can rewrite it ourselves. If we were all just supposed to think Voldemort wanted revenge on Lucius then the whole book didn't happen. That's not the author being tricky, it's the reader saying, "Bored with this book now. I'm going to make up an alternate story." Gerry: There were other DE's involved in the MoM fiasco, remember. Is he going to take revenge on all their families? Magpie: Lucius has always been characterized as the DE on the edge, the slippery friend, playing a little too dangerous a game with Voldemort. He got the diary destroyed. He's been set up for punishment for a long time. It's another example of how JKR really does put signs of stuff like this in the books. -m From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun May 14 19:41:22 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 19:41:22 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152233 > > a_svirn: > > Exactly. Can you recall any folklore fairy tale where love potions > > are being put to good use? (Personally, I cannot. Tristan and Isolde > > certainly made a mess of it.) > > Potioncat: > I'm not saying Love Potions are a good idea. I'm saying they aren't > dark...at least not in this story. a_svirn: House-elf slavery isn't *dark* either. At least, it's certainly legal. > > a_svirn: > > Is that what you think Tom Riddle Sr. did? There must have been more > > to it, since Tom Riddle Jr. was the result. > > Potioncat: > Yeah, these were adults who thought they were in love and were > married. But...whatever its effects on Tom, it wasn't a real > relationship and Merope knew it. Unfortunately, it caused a big > disaster. What she felt probably wasn't love either. a_svirn: Tom did not use the potion and married Merope because he thought he was in love. He thought he was in love and married Merope because of the potion. > > a_svirn: > > If you say they can be *mis*used, you thereby suggest that bending > > other people to your will sexually can be -- in theory at least -- > > put to good use. That of course calls the definition of *good* into > > question. > > Potioncat: > Hold on. You're looking on these as date-rape-potions. That isn't > what they are. a_svirn: Well, *what* they are? They create powerful infatuation or obsession. Sounds like bending other people to your will to me. Sexually, considering the nature of the obsession. At any rate it means altering other people's mental state considerably. > Potioncat: And no, I would not condone something that allowed you > to bend other people to your will...sexually or other wise. OK, put > these characters in the hands of a different author and Bellatrix > could have loads of fun with the potions. But I don't think JKR had > anything like that in mind. a_svirn: She did invent Bellatrix though. So the possibility is there, even in this author's Universe. Besides, I'd say Merope's actions were as bad as anything Bellatrix could come up with. > Potioncat: > Who knows what the effect would have been Harry if he'd taken the > love potion while it was fresh. a_svirn: I guess not much different from the effect Tom Riddle Sr. suffered from. He would have become obsessed with Romilda, completely at her mercy. > Potioncat: We know Molly made a love potion in > her Hogwarts days. a_svirn: And we may guess to what end. > Potioncat: We know the potions are being sold openly. a_svirn: So what? There is lots of stuff going on in the WW that shouldn't be allowed at all. > Potioncat: > But love potions are not out of place in a series that includes > unicorns, witches and magic. a_svirn: Crucio and Imperio are not out of place in this series either. From celizwh at intergate.com Sun May 14 19:39:33 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 19:39:33 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152234 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter > 15, The Unbreakable Vow. houyhnhnm: Excellent summary and thought-provoking questions. I had to wait 'til the weekend to give them my full attention and still can't respond as fully as I would have liked to. 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with Lavender and Hermione's reaction? What about Ron's and Hermione's behavior in Transfiguration? What does Harry (whose thoughts are paraphrased by the narrator) mean by "the depths to which girls would sink to get revenge"? Between the fact that Ron is a sixteen-year-old boy who has just discovered kissing and that fact that he was publicly humiliated for his lack of experience by his little sister, his behavior with Lavender isn't all that surprising, IMO. Nor is Hermione's reaction. But I agree with Harry that asking McLaggan to the party, especially announcing it in front of Ron with the comment "I like /really good/ Quidditch players" (perilously close to the revelation that she confunded McLaggan), is pretty low. It is much worse, IMO, than attacking him with birds. But more interesting to me in the Transfiguration class scene, is the fact that the lesson deals with *human* transfiguration, at last, and the fact that Ron gives himself a handlebar mustache (not a "walrus" mustache, I know, but close). Heads up! :-) 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, potioning him? And how responsible are the Twins, who made and sold the love potions, for the uses to which the potions are put? I think that Hermione, who is so frequently the voice of reason in the Potter series, is wrong in this instance. Possibly because she is so deeply immersed in her own "bad love". Not that her underlying attraction to Ron is bad, but the dangerous and destructive lengths to which her jealosy drives her are very bad indeed. The most conclusive proof that love potions are Dark and dangerous is the fact that the very existence of Lord Voldemort is due to their use. Merope would never have induced Tom Riddle, Sr. to marry her, and Tom Marvolo Riddle would never have been born, without the use of a love potion. How responsible are Fred and George for furnishing the love potion that almost, indirectly, kills their brother? How responsible are they for indirectly providing Draco with the means of bringing DEs into the castle, and for, indirectly again, furnishing them with the means of eluding the DAs when they emerge from the RoR? This is a question I would very much like answered in book 7. Are Dark Lords (of which Voldemort is only the latest manifestation) the cause or the result of evil? Is the true genesis of evil to be found in the everyday petty sins of omission and commission performed by otherwise "good" people? 3)[snip] Is he just using the Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really learning more from the Prince than he ever learned from the adult Snape or Slughorn? I think it is the Prince's mind that fascinates Harry, not potions per se. It shows how rich the student-teacher relationship between Harry and Snape could have been, if only .... 4) We later learn that Madam Pince is not the only person listening behind the shelves: Draco is there as well. JKR is clearly misleading the reader with a false or incomplete explanation. There is misleading going on in this scene, and there is also leading. My favorite: "I'm not taliking about your stupid so-called Prince," said Hermione, giving his book a nasty look *as though it had been rude to her*. [emphasis added] It had, or rather its previous owner had. Then there is "[Madam Pince's] long hooked nose illuminated unflatteringly by the lamp she was carrying." And there is the linking together of Filch and Madam Pinch. 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? What does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or contrasted with Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Harry's decision to invite Luna was triggered, I believe, by her behavior to Hermione and her generous and candid remarks about Ron. It is an excellent example of Harry's power "that the Dark Lord knows not". His decision to invite her was spontaneous and disinterested. There was no calculation, no ulterior motive (a little concern with what others would think--he's a teenage boy after all--but he overcame it.) It stands in stark contrast to Hermione's behavior, and so do the consequences. Harry earns Ginny's approbation by inviting Luna to the party and Luna gets him out of an uncomfortable three-way conversation with Snape and Slughorn. Hermione only succeeds in hurting the object of *her* desire and suffers a very unpleasant evening (and she will have gotten off very lightly, IMO, if one bad evening is the end of it.) 7) And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star pupil, Severus Snape? Very good question! Trelawney has nothing to recommend her to Slughorn. Poor, obscure, not a mixer, not even a very competent witch, AFAWK. The only reason she even has a job is because of the prophecy. I find her presence at the party very strange. If he had issued a blanket invitation to all faculty, surely one or two others, besides Snape, might have at least have put in an appearance. He calls her Sybill. He says "... I can tell you that, Sybill--" We don't know whether the emphasis was on "you" or "that". 7) [...] Do you detect any genuine affection on Slughorn's part for his brilliant former student, or is it all jovial bluster and too much mead? I was chiefly struck by the similarity to Dumbledore's "handling" of Snape. ("Come Severus, there's a delicious-looking custard tart I want to sample--") And I am more interested in whether or not *Dumbledore* has any genuine affection for his brilliant former student. Slughorn' s affections, at their most genuine, appear to me to be rather shallow. But, I think there is much about Slughorn that we still don't know. From celizwh at intergate.com Sun May 14 20:02:35 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 20:02:35 -0000 Subject: JKR's Misleading the reader and DD In-Reply-To: <46d.2ab6d8.31989a51@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152235 Nikkalmati: > I was struck by the scene in the Mirror of > Eresed where he says to Harry that if he were > to look into the mirror he would see himself > holding a pair of socks. He covers up by saying > something like you can't have too many socks, but > a gift of clothes (specifically socks in Dobby's case) > is a sign of freedom. houyhnhnm: Oh, very interesting! I, too, have been puzzled by DD's comment about seeing himself with socks in the Mirror of Erised. I took it partly as an evasion and partly as an example of Dumbledorian whimsy, but also felt it must have some added significance. I never made the connection with Dobby and his socks of liberation though. What is the nature of Dumbledore's servitude? And whence comes his power which seems to be so far beyond that of other wizards? From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun May 14 20:13:09 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 20:13:09 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152236 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > The students, as a group, ate at the Slytherin table. We aren't told > if there were other contacts. We know that not all Slytherins are so > biased in their beliefs as the Malfoys and Blacks. Geoff: Canon does not imply that Viktor Krum and his fellow students made an immediate beeline for the Slytherins: 'Ron took care to sit on the side facing the doorway because Krum and his fellow Durmstrang students were still gathered around it, apparently unsure about where they should sit... ..."Over here! Come and sit over here! Ron hissed. "Over here! Hermione, budge up, make a space -" "What?" "Too late," said Ron bitterly. Viktor Krum and and his fellow Durmstrang students had setlled themselves at the Slytherin table. Harry could see Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle looking very smug about this.' (GOF "The Goblet of Fire" pp.119, 120 UK edition) I get a sense that the Slyhtherins had not necessarily expected the visitors to sit with them and were a bit chuffed becauise they'd managed to get their attention before the Gryffindors. There is also a suggestion that Krum was not totally happy with the Durmstrang set-up: '"Wonder how the Durmstrang students are getting back?" said Ron. "D'you reckon they can steer that ship without Karkaroff?" "Karkaroff did not steer," said a gruff voice. "He stayed in his cabin and let us do the vork" Krum had come to say goodbye to Hermione... ..."I liked Diggory," said Krum abruptly to Harry. "He vos alvays polite to me. Alvays. Even though I vos from Durmstrang - with Karkaroff" he added scowling.' (GOF "The Beginning" pp.628, 629 UK edition) Reading between the lines, I get a feeling that Viktor Krum was not a Karkaroff fan. A follow-up question would be, that although IK is or was a Death Eater, is there a pureblood restriction on entry to the school? From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sun May 14 20:27:35 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 20:27:35 -0000 Subject: JKR's Misleading the reader and DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152237 houyhnhnm: > Oh, very interesting! I, too, have been puzzled by DD's comment about seeing himself with socks in the Mirror of Erised. I took it partly as an evasion and partly as an example of Dumbledorian whimsy, but also felt it must have some added significance. I never made the > connection with Dobby and his socks of liberation though. Steven1975aaa: There are other references to socks all over the books, for example I think Harry has a pair of Uncle Vernon's worst old socks which he gives to Dobby, Dobby and Harry later exchange gifts of socks, Harry keeps his lucky potion wrapped up in an old sock, hands it to Ron who says what do I need with an old sock (something like that). I think when DD said that he was being evasive (after all it was quite a personal question), to him getting warm socks rather than books is about love/comfort/family. I think when DD looks into the Mirror he sees Harry prevailing over Voldemort and surviving and growing up into adulthood, and he wasn't about to reveal that to Harry in book 1. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 20:33:12 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 20:33:12 -0000 Subject: Possible Flint in HBP re the Invisibility Cloak? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152238 At the beginning of HBP, DD tells Harry to keep his Invisibility Cloak with him at all times and Harry agrees to do it. Yet, after DD explains they are going Horcrux-Hunting, he instructs Harry to go get the cloak. (Chapter 25) The text does not say that Harry gets his cloak, but does tell us that Harry retrieve the Marauder's Map and Felix from his trunk, which he gives to Hermione and Ron. And, Harry tells them that DD "thinks" he is getting his cloak. Which, to me, implies that Harry, in fact, had the cloak all along. I'm confused. I can understand why Harry wanted DD to think he needed to retrieve his cloak, but I don't understand why, given that DD had instructed Harry to always carry the cloak and Harry agreed, why DD didn't ask Harry if he had the cloak or didn't assume that Harry had the cloak. Even if Harry didn't have the cloak, we've no indication that DD used Occlumency in this situation. Maybe Harry wasn't wearing his robes and DD knew the robe wouldn't fit into his pants? If so, I wonder why DD doesn't "remind" Harry that he promised to keep the cloak with him at all times? Any thoughts? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 21:01:51 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 21:01:51 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: <00f201c6778a$d99e72f0$5760400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152239 Carol earlier: > > You still haven't answered my question of whether 1) Voldemort recruited Draco, gave him the seemingly impossible assignment of killing DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I have just the way!" or, 2) Draco went to him with *no* plan, Voldemort assigned him to kill DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I have just the way!" or 3) Draco went to LV *with* a plan, which Voldemort then converted to his own use, reocognizing it as a perfect opportunity to make sure that DD was killed if the plan succeeded, but also indicating that he wanted DD dead regardless. > > > I really don't see alternatives 1) or 2) as remotely feasible. > > Magpie: > Nevertheless 1) / 2) is what we are told in canon. 3) is not. No one in canon questions the feasibility of 1/2. Draco's worth as a DE is openly questioned, and that question answered by the fact that Voldemort is planning for him to die to punish his father. I think if the Cabinets came into it that conclusion would be there in the books. > Carol responds: Problem: 1) and 2) are contradictory and cannot both be true. They are *not* what we're told in canon, and if no one in canon questions them, it's because no one except Draco and LV knows about the Vanishing Cabinet plan. Nowhere are we told whether Draco went to Voldemort or Voldemort came to him. Both of us are deducing what we believe to be the most logical sequence of events, and clearly we have arrived at opposing conclusions. But I've already cited the canon supporting my chronology upthread, whereas you're deducing yours from the incomplete information on which the adult characters base their assumptions. You're taking what is said by the adults in "Spinner's End" to be fact, but aside from Snape's tendency to omit information and speak in half truths, none of the characters present knows the whole story. Bella admits that she's no longer in the Dark Lord's confidence; Snape knows nothing of the Vanishing Cabinet plan, as we find out in "The Unbreakable Vow"; and Draco is concealing his plans from his mother as well since he slips away from her in "Draco's Detour." They are all *assuming* that Voldemort is punishing Lucius, which may well be true, but Voldemort's decision to use Draco in that way does not necessitate his ordering Draco to kill Dumbledore *before* he knows about Draco's Vanishing Cabinet plan. On the contrary, knowing Draco's plan gives LV exactly the weapon he needs to simultaneously kill Dumbledore and punish Lucius. If all LV needed to kill Dumbledore was Snape, as you imply, Dumbledore would have been dead years earlier (assuming ESE!Snape). Certainly Snape could have let DD die from the ring Horcrux curse if he had wanted to kill him. Instead, Snape saved DD from death even though he couldn't save his hand. So, no; just having Snape in Hogwarts is no guarantee that Dumbledore is going to die. The Unbreakable Vow, having the DEs in the castle ready to kill Draco if he fails to kill DD, and Dumbledore's wandless, weakened condition are all necessary precursors to Dumbledore's death at the hands of Snape. The situation in which Snape is forced to kill Dumbledore (either to save his own life or to save the lives of Draco and Harry, take your pick) would not and could not have occurred if Draco hadn't brought the DEs into the castle. (The DEs would have killed DD if Snape hadn't done so, but I don't want to get sidetracked on that.) So the information Draco provides LV about a way to get DEs into the castle plays into Voldemort's hands: He can use Draco to punish Lucius, get rid of Dumbledore, and force Snape to kill Dumbledore himself in the probable event that Draco fails. For Voldemort, this information is a windfall, the means to an end (or ends) he could not otherwise have accomplished. Carol, noting that a great deal of information regarding Draco's activities, including that business of the Imperius Curse, is denied to us because we don't see from Draco's POV--and neither do the characters, who make their own assumptions based on the limited evidence available to them From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun May 14 21:33:20 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 21:33:20 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152240 > > a_svirn: > Well, *what* they are? They create powerful infatuation or > obsession. Sounds like bending other people to your will to me. > Sexually, considering the nature of the obsession. At any rate it > means altering other people's mental state considerably. Potioncat: So does Confundus. So does Cheering Charms. They arent' sexual, but they alter the mental state. > > a_svirn: > She did invent Bellatrix though. So the possibility is there, even > in this author's Universe. Besides, I'd say Merope's actions were as > bad as anything Bellatrix could come up with. Potioncat: Oh, yeah. That was bad. And I do understand that Tom thought he was in love because of the Potion. That he married Merope because of the potion. I'm not saying love potions are good or OK at all. Certainly I wouldn't want them to exist in the real world. What this really comes down to, is what is Dark Magic? Even when Harry performed Dark magic, he only got a couple of scoldings and a long term detention. No one packed him up to Azkaban or broke his wand. I think confundus "should" be Dark. I think making leeks grow out of someone ears "should" be Dark. I think writing "sneak" on someone's face...a mark that doesn't go away..."should" be Dark. I might put love potions in Dark too...particularly since so many list members have thought up Dark uses for them that I wouldn't have. But if the question is, are love potions dark in the WW, then no they aren't. We never saw what a normal love potion would do. We saw Merope administer one for a long period of time. We saw Ron take an usually strong one. We heard about the danger of the strongest one known. My thoughts were that a normal love potion would make you feel an attraction toward someone for a brief period of time. That seems harmless enough.(In a fictional world) People go through all sorts of efforts for that very reason every day. If Merope had only used the potion to get Tom's attention, it would have been ok. Keep in mind, I mean, she gives him the love potion, they go out on a date, exchange a chaste good-night kiss. The next morning he wakes up and thinks, "What a horrible nightmare!" They never see each other again. > > Potioncat: > We know Molly made a love potion in > > her Hogwarts days. > > a_svirn: > And we may guess to what end. Potioncat: But we don't know. I suspect she quickly lost interest in the object of her affections. It seems very obvious that Molly and Arthur have a real, loving relationship. You don't get that from a love potion, as Merope found out. > > > Potioncat: > We know the potions are being sold openly. > > a_svirn: > So what? There is lots of stuff going on in the WW that shouldn't be > allowed at all. Potioncat: Agreed. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 21:46:56 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 21:46:56 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152241 > >>Carol: > > > You still haven't answered my question of whether 1) Voldemort > > > recruited Draco, gave him the seemingly impossible assignment > > > of killing DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I have just > > > the way!" or, 2) Draco went to him with *no* plan, Voldemort > > > assigned him to kill DD, and Draco piped up with, "Oh, yeah! I > > > have just the way!" or 3) Draco went to LV *with* a plan, > > > which Voldemort then converted to his own use, reocognizing it > > > as a perfect opportunity to make sure that DD was killed if > > > the plan succeeded, but also indicating that he wanted DD dead > > > regardless. > >>Magpie: > > Nevertheless 1) / 2) is what we are told in canon. 3) is not. No > > one in canon questions the feasibility of 1/2. > > > >>Carol: > Problem: 1) and 2) are contradictory and cannot both be true. Betsy Hp: They can't both be true, but they're both reasonable guesses based on canon. While (3) is unreasonable and seems to be drawn from a lot of imagination and much twisting of canon, IMO. And yes, that's all based on Spinner's End. Where yes, there were lies told, but a lot of truth as well. (Though I think the stuff on the tower backs up the possibility of the first two choices, and again, negates the third.) Honestly, I find the idea of Draco approaching Voldemort on his own quite ridiculous (which knocks out both 2 & 3). How on earth is Draco supposed to *find* Voldemort? His mother certainly isn't going to tell him. And if his Aunt had brought Draco to Voldemort at Draco's urging, Narcissa would have killed Bellatrix. We see in Spinner's End that Narcissa values her son and her husband above her sister. And that she does *not* want her son receiving any sort of attention from Voldemort. I also question the supposition that Draco had the Vanishing Cabinet plan in mind from the moment of recieving the assignment. Why on earth would he wait an entire summer before approaching Borgin about how to fix the cabinet? For that matter, why would he wait (and why would Voldemort *let him wait*) to prevent Borgin from selling the Cabinet in the store? For that matter, it doesn't make sense that Draco knew about the Cabinets until the summer. Montague wasn't talking when he first came out of the cabinet. And he was whisked off campus before he made a recovery. > >>Carol: > You're taking what is said by the adults in "Spinner's End" to be > fact, but aside from Snape's tendency to omit information and > speak in half truths, none of the characters present knows the > whole story. > > They are all *assuming* that Voldemort is punishing Lucius... > Betsy Hp: I disagree. I think Snape knows exactly how Voldemort feels about Lucius. For one, we know that Snape must have witnessed Voldemort's rage when he realized Lucius had allowed one of his horcruxes to be destroyed (unless Dumbledore has *another* spy amongst the Death Eaters). For another, Snape says he tried to talk Voldemort out of giving Draco the assignment, but that Voldemort was too eager to see Lucius punished. I also feel that it's fairly obvious that Narcissa runs to Snape pretty much the moment she realizes what Draco's been told to do. So Snape knowing about the assignment before she arrives suggests that Voldemort had the assignment in mind before giving it to Draco. IOWs, as Magpie said, Voldemort is the man with the plan.) Of course, Snape could be lying about having any such conversation, but both Narcissa and Bellatrix believe him. Which suggests that Snape at least has Voldemort's character pegged: Lucius has failed him twice; Lucius will pay. Though honestly I think it makes more sense to see this tidbit of information as truthful. > >>Carol: > If all LV needed to kill Dumbledore was Snape, as you imply, > Dumbledore would have been dead years earlier (assuming ESE! > Snape). > Betsy Hp: Before going after the Potters, Voldemort doesn't need Dumbledore dead. Voldemort was winning. After killing Lily, Voldemort *couldn't* order Dumbledore's death, being vapor!Mort at that time. After GoF Voldemort was trying to lie low and keep his return a secret. The moment Voldemort starts going all out, he cooks up a plan to kill Dumbledore, and Snape is the assassin. Draco is a distraction and a nicely cruel way to punish a naughty Death Eater. I agree with Magpie, there doesn't seem to be any point to getting the Death Eaters into Hogwarts except as backup for Draco. Probably why Voldemort sent in his brute squad sort. They too, were cannon fodder. Betsy Hp From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 20:41:10 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:41:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060514204110.59384.qmail@web61317.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152242 Pippin: I'm not talking about who should be punished. Punishment can be counterproductive -- it was Ginny's fear of punishment that kept her from trying to get help. You're saying Ginny's only mistake was to trust the book. I'm saying she made a further mistake in trying to cover up what was happening to her when she stopped trusting it. That *was* signing up for murder--she knew that the attacks were no joke. Like Draco, she was only fortunate that no one was killed. I think Dumbledore's mercy helped her to understand that she made a bad choice, just as it helped Draco to understand that his choices were wrong. Joe: Ginny at the time was an eleven year old girl with almost no magical training who was under a magical compulsion from the most powerful Dark Wizard of the age. Of course her not telling some one about the book was a mistake it is also perfectly understandable given the circumstances. Draco was at the time either an adult or so very close to the age of majority in the WW that it makes no difference. The only compulsion he faced was a societal one and quite frankly a poor one at that. His entire time at school he has been confronted that evidence that what he has been taught was wrong and yet he gleefully followed down the same path as his criminal family. Draco understood his choices were wrong? In my copy of the HBP he couldn't kill Dumbledore but didn't do anything to stop it nor did he try and stay to make amends. In my copy of HBP he ran off with the other DE's before they could get caught. Sorry but thinking Draco some how saw the light is wishful thinking. Yeah he was surrpised by Fenrir being there but only because he didn't want his friends being hurt. Fenrir could have eaten every Gryffindor and we all know Malfoy would have just stood there. Draco couldn't kill DUmbledore because he is gutless not because he saw the light. He tried numerous attempts to do in the old man in ways that wouldn't force him to do it up close and personal and had no trouble at all with his conscience. Only when he had to do it looking Dumbledore in the eye did his conviction fail him. Draco should not get a pass for his actions because he did not have the fortitude to do something he had been trying to do for months. He was compassionate, he wasn't seeing the light, he was just a coward. Comparing the actions of a scared eleven year old girl and an of age soldier(yes when you join a terrorist group you join the war) and saying they are equivalent is ridiculous. Next we are going to hear that Voldemort isn't responsible for his actions. Joe From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun May 14 22:11:24 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 22:11:24 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152243 > > a_svirn: > > Well, *what* they are? They create powerful infatuation or > > obsession. Sounds like bending other people to your will to me. > > Sexually, considering the nature of the obsession. At any rate it > > means altering other people's mental state considerably. > > Potioncat: > So does Confundus. So does Cheering Charms. They arent' sexual, but > they alter the mental state. a_svirn: Love potions are sexual, however. > Potioncat: > > I think confundus "should" be Dark. I think making leeks grow out of > someone ears "should" be Dark. I think writing "sneak" on someone's > face...a mark that doesn't go away..."should" be Dark. I might put > love potions in Dark too...particularly since so many list members > have thought up Dark uses for them that I wouldn't have. But if the > question is, are love potions dark in the WW, then no they aren't. a_svirn: Which brings us back to the definition of *dark*. If it's just something classified as such by the Ministry, I rather think I agree with Draco ? it's a bit of a joke. > Potioncat: > We never saw what a normal love potion would do. We saw Merope > administer one for a long period of time. a_svirn: Why do you think Merope's one was abnormal? > Potioncat: > My thoughts were that a normal love potion would make you feel an > attraction toward someone for a brief period of time. That seems > harmless enough. a_svirn: No, it doesn't. It means messing up with other people minds. What you call "normal" potion is nothing but a weak solution of one. Rather like a short bout of Crucatius. Harry or Neville weren't exposed to the torture for long, so they recovered nicely. Neville's parents were exposed to it for too long and will never recover. But the curse was one and the same. And Merope's potion was normal enough I imagine. > Potioncat: > If Merope had only used the potion to get Tom's attention, it would > have been ok. Keep in mind, I mean, she gives him the love potion, > they go out on a date, exchange a chaste good-night kiss. The next > morning he wakes up and thinks, "What a horrible nightmare!" They > never see each other again. a_svirn: And it wouldn't be bending him to her will?! Chaste or not it would be up to her, I take it. He would have no saying at all. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 22:21:16 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 22:21:16 -0000 Subject: Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152244 > >>Betsy Hp: > > Ron had every right. He's her older brother, and she was > > putting herself into a position to earn those sort of > > nicknames. It was his duty as the elder sibling to call her on > > her behavior. > >>Gerry: > ????? What behaviour? Having a couple of boyfriends at the > appropriate age for discovering boys? > Betsy Hp: No. Making out with one of those boyfriends in a public, and popularly travelled hallway. That's the sort of behavior that could earn Ginny a bad reputation. Ron, as her elder sibling, had a duty to step in and stop that behavior. If Ginny *had* earned a bad reputation, you can bet your brass boots Molly would have questioned Ron on what he'd been up to while his baby sister ran around making a spectical of herself. > >>Phoenixgod: > > I went to high school with my younger sister, and > you bet your behind I watched out for her. No one knows better > than a teenage brother what boys want to do to their nubile > teenage sister. If Ginny had been my sister... Betsy Hp: Nice to hear from you again, Phoenixgod! I totally agree. I went to highschool with one of my younger sisters and I would have called her on that sort of behavior too. It's what older siblings do. And, quite frankly, it's what parents expect older sibling to do. > >>Gerry: > The only person who had issues was Ron himself, which had a lot > more to do with him not being popular with the girls. Betsy Hp: Where on earth do you get that idea? Ron isn't experienced, true. But he's got Lavander giggling and whispering with her friends when he walks by. That suggests that he's seen as a bit of stud. He just hasn't bothered to take advantage of that fact. Yet. > >>Gerry: > Besides, the idea that elder brothers are somehow responsible and > justified to control their younger sibblings behaviour is > reprehensible. Reminds me of those honour killings we see now when > sis has a non-muslim boyfriend. Betsy Hp: Um, no. I'm not saying I'd have *killed* my sister if I'd caught her in the clinch with some guy in a public place. I'd have just called her on her behavior. Also, as an older sister, I'm not saying it's just older *brothers* who have a duty to look out for their younger siblings. It's part and parcel of being an elder sibling. > >>Betsy Hp: > > But where was Ginny's anger of Justice when Luna's stuff was > > stolen? That's what I meant about JKR not giving us a clear > > case of Ginny's "righteous" anger. > >>Gerry: > Does Ginny even know? > Betsy Hp: To be fair, Ginny might not know. But it does mean that bringing up Ginny's being kind to Luna (to her face, anyway) doesn't go very far in backing up the argument that Ginny's anger is righteous. Because Ginny has never fought a righteous battle. It's all been very personal and petty stuff. The fact that we know Luna is picked on, and that we know Ginny likes Luna, but that JKR never bothers to put those two facts together, suggests that perhaps we're not supposed to see Ginny's anger as anything other than unhealthy. Otherwise, why not give us a clearcut example of Ginny's anger being helpful? > >>Gerry: > Well, if I would have had an older brother like Ron I would have > treated him much worse than Ginny. He was awful, patriarchal, and > behaving like he belonged in the Victorian age. He needed his > commupance and needed it badly. Betsy Hp: Do you have an older sibling? Or a younger sibling for that matter? Because honestly, Ron does nothing out of line. Actually, he's pretty laid back when it comes to Ginny. We don't see him sitting Dean down for a little talk on how Ginny is supposed to be treated, or following Ginny on dates, or anything of that sort. It's only when Ginny pushes her sexual awakening in Ron's face that Ron says anything at all. > >>Gerry: > And it was all over when he finally had his own girlfriend. We > don't find Ron mentioning Ginny havin extensive snogging sessions > in the common room, yet guess who does... Betsy Hp: And that's because Ron doesn't have any older siblings of his own at Hogwarts anymore. (See what happens when you let the little ones get out of line? ) But yeah, Ron was hypocritical there. Though I'm betting he'd have *still* said something if Ginny and Dean started making out in the commonroom. Not fair, but that's life. > >>Nick: > > > I hate to break it to everyone, but we're supposed to LIKE > > > Ginny. We're supposed to laugh at her jokes. We're supposed > > > to approve of her behavior. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Why? > >>Gerry: > Because she is a very likable popular girl. Betsy Hp: Where do you get that from? Boys think she's pretty, but that's about all we see as far as Ginny being popular. As for likable, I guess she could be, once she gets that massive chip off her shoulder. At the moment she's a bit too likely to throw a punch (or a hex) to be called likable. I'd say the only reason we're supposed to think Ginny is this wonderful girl is based on JKR's interviews. There's little in the actual canon to say that she's wonderful. But there's a lot to show that she's got some major issues that need to be delt with. Again, everytime Ginny unleashes she hurts the people she loves. That makes it hard for me to believe that her anger, her temper, are a good thing. Betsy Hp From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun May 14 23:39:43 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 23:39:43 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152245 > >>Carol: > CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 15, The Unbreakable Vow. > > Discussion Questions: > 1) What do you think of Ron's public "snogging" sessions with > Lavender... Betsy Hp: Very, very typical for highschool. I think everyone had such a couple blocking lockers and treating every class apart as the pit of doom. > ... and Hermione's reaction? What about Ron's and Hermione's > behavior in Transfiguration? Betsy Hp: It was interesting to me that Ron is better at verbal cruelty than Hermione. I think it goes towards him being more empathetic than she is. > What does Harry (whose thoughts are paraphrased by the narrator) > mean by "the depths to which girls would sink to get revenge"? Betsy Hp: I think they both mean that girls can be scary. Hell hath no fury, etc., etc. > 2) Hermione says that love potions are not Dark or dangerous, but > Harry, the intended recipient, disagrees. How "dark" is Romilda's > plot to get Harry to take her to Slughorn's party by, erm, > potioning him? And how responsible are the Twins, who made and > sold the love potions, for the uses to which the potions are put? Betsy Hp: I honestly have no idea how the WW breaks down what is "dark" magic and what is not. I suspect it's arbitrary, like flying brooms being allowed but flying carpets a definite no-no. Because love potions do strike me as dangerous, as we and Harry have seen. But, since the WW does not outlaw love potions the twins are not breaking any laws buy selling them. They are, however, breaking laws by smuggling them into Hogwarts. Which means they're evil. No, I'm kidding. It does show they play pretty fast and loose with rules though. (I know, big surprise. ) > 3) Harry expresses real interest in the Prince's notes on > Everlasting Elixirs and defends his book against both Hermione's > aspersions and Madam Pince's grasping hands. Is he just using the > Prince's notes to get marks he doesn't deserve, or is he really > learning more from the Prince than he ever learned from the adult > Snape or Slughorn? How might this new interest in Potions, if it > lasts, play out in Book 7? Betsy Hp: I agree with other posters that Harry doesn't really show a new interest in Potions, specifically. He follows the Prince's instructions but doesn't seem interesed in the "how" or "why" of it all. I also agree with houyhnhnm, that Harry shows more of an interest in how the Prince thinks as a person. It points to a personal connection between Harry and Snape without their personal issues getting in the way. > 4) We later learn that Madam Pince is not the only person listening > behind the shelves: Draco is there as well. JKR is clearly > misleading the reader with a false or incomplete explanation. Can > you think of any other "explanations" that may be revealed as > misleading in the future? Betsy Hp: ESE! or OFH!Snape. > 5) Just for fun, why might Harry think that Filch and Pince are in > love? Is Harry right? Betsy Hp: I think it points towards Harry being more aware generally of people coupling, because he's interested in it for himself now. And based on Dumbledore's funeral, Harry may well be right. > 6) Why do you think that Harry invited Luna to Slughorn's party? > What does his doing so tell us about him, compared to or > contrasted with Hermione's inviting Cormac McLaggen? Betsy Hp: Harry is more grownup than Hermione. And more honest. > Do you agree with Harry that Hermione got what she deserved when > Cormac ambushed her under the mistletoe? Why or why not? Betsy Hp: Hmm, I do hate the "she was asking for it" defense. But Hermione lead McLaggen astray, so I'm going to say, yeah, she reaped what she sowed. Especially since we don't see McLaggen actually *forcing* Hermione into anything. > 7) What do you make of Luna's conversation with Trelawney? What > insights into Luna does this chapter provide, or is she strictly > comic relief? Betsy Hp: I read it as comic relief, myself. And I did laugh aloud a few times the first time through. > And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along > with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star > pupil, Severus Snape? Betsy Hp: Because both Trelawney and Snape are Slugclub members. Trelawney, like McLaggen and Blaise, is there because of her family (her grandmother Cassandra, the famous seerer). Snape, like Hermione, is there because of his abilities. > Just for fun, why do you think JKR included the Vampire Sanguini > as a party guest? Betsy Hp: Humor was a big part of it, I'm sure. She plays rather well on the whole "sexy vampire" thing by having several girls interested in Sanguini, and him interested in them. Also, since HBP deals a lot with lust, it was clever to throw in a vampire, creature of lust. > 7) Why does Snape react as he does to Slughorn's statement that > Harry is a "natural" at Potions? Betsy Hp: Because he knows Harry *isn't* a natural at Potions. > Are his suspicions aroused at this point? Betsy Hp: C'mon. This is Snape! And Harry is involved. Of *course* his suspicions are aroused. > Do you detect any genuine affection on Slughorn's part for his > brilliant former student, or is it all jovial bluster and too much > mead? Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? > Why or why not? Betsy Hp: There must be some affection there or Snape wouldn't have attended the party. Nor would he have suffered being snatched out of the crowd. We learn at Spinner's End that Snape actually can handle social occasions well (contrary to much fanon) so I imagine he was even enjoying himself a little. I didn't feel sorry for Snape at all. I didn't get the sense that he was insulted by Slughorn's talking about Harry's sudden potion abilities. Again, he's Snape. Only the Marauders seem to be able to really get under Snape's skin. And he's known Slughorn for a while now. He must be used to Slughorn's ways. > 8) Why does Draco claim to be "gate-crashing" when he was actually > upstairs? To avoid drawing attention to his activites and getting himself and his family killed. > Why does he look angry when Slughorn allows him to stay? Because he's not wanting to stay. He's wanting to get to the Room of Requirement so he can work on the Cabinet. > The narrator, voicing Harry's perspective, asks: "Why was Snape > looking at Malfoy as though both angry and . . . was it > possible? . . . a little afraid?" How would you answer the > narrator's (or Harry's) questions? Betsy Hp: Draco is up to something, and Snape doesn't know what it is. That means Draco and the rest of the students are in danger. As Snape is supposed to be acting as a barrier between Draco and the students and Draco and Voldemort, this lack of knowledge both angers and frightens Snape. (Maybe more frightens which leads him to being angry.) > 9) Draco's appearance suggests that he's suffering from stress or > insomnia. Do you think that he was really too ill to play Quidditch > (previous chapter)? Betsy Hp: Draco may have been ill, but I think his main goal was getting free time with people out of the castle to work on the Cabinet. I think Draco would have dragged himself to work on the Cabinet if blood was coming out his ears. He's running out of time, and he knows it. > How do you account for the change in his attitude toward his Head > of House and former favorite professor? What parallels, if any, do > you see between this relationship and Harry's with Dumbledore? Betsy Hp: To answer the first question, Draco is becoming disillusioned. With Voldemort, with the Death Eaters, with everything his parents taught him. Snape, as stand in father-figure, is catching the brunt of Draco's discontent. Which answers the second question, I think. Harry went through the same disillusionment, to an extent, in OotP. Fortunately for Harry, he only had to realize that Dumbledore was human. Not that he was also completely mistaken, which I think is a harder lesson to learn. > 10) Clearly, Crabbe and Goyle are not taking NEWT DADA with Harry > and Draco. Might they be repeating fifth-year DADA (rather than > taking no DADA class at all), and could they, theoretically, > repeat their DADA OWLs as Snape implies? Betsy Hp: I imagine the slower students were the most effected by Umbridges' terrible teaching. So I'd imagine there are more than just Crabbe and Goyle repeating fifth year DADA so they can take their OWLs again. (Unless this is just something Snape insists on for his Slytherins. Though I'm not sure Flitwick and Sprout would like their students to be so untrained.) If Snape, a head of house, suggests that students can retake their OWLs, I see no reason to disbelieve him. It's not like JKR has laid out exactly how things are done at Hogwarts. We only get a very limited view. > What, if anything, does this detail tell us about Snape's attitude > toward DADA? Is he really concerned about Crabbe's and Goyle's > DADA OWLs? What is he trying to accomplish by putting them in > detention? Betsy Hp: I'd say Snape sees DADA as important, that he does care for his students, but that he's killing more than one bird here. If Draco doesn't have assistance hopefully he'll come to Snape for help. Unfortunately, Draco has lost a great deal of trust for Snape, it seems. > 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt at > Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his > accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? Betsy Hp: I hear Bellatrix in just about all of Draco's statements. She's using Draco to gain her own glory, and Draco is too young and inexperienced to realize it. And I think he's confused because everything he's been taught to believe is starting to come down around his ears. > How successful are his attempts to evade Snape's questions? What, > if anything, does Snape learn from Draco's answers? Betsy Hp: He learns that Draco has been, and might still be, under Bellatrix's influence. He learns that Draco has a specific plan that he's working on. He learns that Draco has help from someone he considers a good source of help (Bellatrix?). Snape actually learns quite a bit, despite Draco's successful occlumency. > 12) Snape changes tactics several times during the interview. How > and why? Betsy Hp: I don't get the sense that Snape purposefully chose various tactics to get information out of Draco. I think he's genuinely worried about Draco, and trying very hard to reach him. But each question seemed to flow from Draco's responses. To my mind, the conversation pointed to a close relationship between Draco and Snape. That Draco was comfortable being that open with Snape, that Snape was able to continue the conversation for as long as he did without Draco shutting down, all suggest that they know each other pretty well. > Are these changes an indication of weakness or strength? Betsy Hp: Frustration more than anything, IMO. And fear for Draco. > Do any of his statements or questions seem deliberately ambiguous > or misleading? How does this conversation tie in with, or affect > your understanding of, "Spinner's End"? Betsy Hp: It confirmed for me that Narcissa turned to the right man for help. I think Snape was being as honest as he could be in this situation. I think he really does want to help Draco. Not to kill Dumbledore but to get him out of this trap Voldemort has put him in. > 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or > "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? Betsy Hp: That Snape is cool! Seriously, I think Snape has his game face on. He's doing his best to get at the truth here without showing his own hand. > Why does Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? Betsy Hp: Wasn't Draco heading back to his house? There'd have been no benefit to following Draco, and walking past the party, immediately following Draco, would have only pulled suspicion down on either Snape or Draco. > 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's > loyalties lie? Betsy Hp: It did nothing to sway them. DDM!Snape, all the way! > Why do you think the chapter is titled "The Unbreakable Vow" when > the vow is barely mentioned? Betsy Hp: Because this is when Harry finds out that Snape has sworn to such a thing. That information is important. Really good discussion, Carol! I'm glad I was finally able to tackle it. Betsy Hp From foodiedb at optonline.net Sun May 14 23:48:56 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (David) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 23:48:56 -0000 Subject: Reparo Spell/Rita Skeeter a man/ the one who show magic later in life Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152246 Hi, Has there any been any reason given as to why one can't use the reparo spell on broken wands or broken bones? Has the theory that Rita Skeeter is man, been discussed here? I searched the messages best I could and didn't find anything. Has anyone brought up the idea that the one who JKR says will show magic later in life, might be Uncle Dursley? Thanks, David From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 00:19:25 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 00:19:25 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152247 > Betsy Hp: > I disagree. I think Snape knows exactly how Voldemort feels about Lucius. For another, Snape says he tried to talk Voldemort out of giving Draco the assignment, but that Voldemort was too eager to see Lucius punished. Carol responds: Sorry, Betsy, but this is a flat-out error. Snape actually refuses to do any such thing: "If you are imagining I can persuade the Dark Lord to change his mind, I am afraid there is no hope, no hope at all" (HBP Am. ed. 33). IOW, Snape knows that he'd be Crucio'd or murdered if he made any such attempt and has no intention of doing so. I've already given my reasons for thinking that Draco must have approached Voldemort with his Vanishing Cabinet idea, which I understand that you disagree with, but I'm rather surprised that you'd call them "unreasonable." I supported them with canon in various points in the thread, and I've seen no canon yet to the contrary. Again, Voldemort's motive of revenge against Lucius, which I've conceded (or rather, never denied), does not in any way contradict Draco's coming to Voldemort and Voldemort's taking advantage of Draco's discovery. How about some canon to convince me that Voldemort came after Draco? Voldemort's motives in going after Dumbledore are beside the point, which is simple chronology. Carol, with apologies for the fourth post From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon May 15 00:53:52 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 17:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: <00bc01c6777e$06be7e90$5760400c@Spot> Message-ID: <20060515005352.25826.qmail@web53113.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152248 > bboyminn > > In my view, it seems too irrational and pointless to start the plan > by > initially telling Draco to kill Dumbledore. That is a plan with no > hope of success.You are right, there is an element of vengence in > Voldemort's plan. > > Magpie: > Which is exactly what the plan is supposed to be, as we are told in > canon. It is not supposed to be a success. Voldemort's plan is > for Draco to die, not for Dumbledore to die at the hand of Draco. > There is not "an element" > of vengeance, the plan is about vengeance. I agree with Magpie. Getting the DE's into Hogwarts was entirely Draco's idea: he's really not the "lone killer" type, and I think he just naturally needs back up. Also it's possible that Draco was hoping that in the confusion of an attack Dumbledore would be killed by someone else or that it would be easier for Draco to kill him in the heat of battle. Draco was supposed to fail - Narcissa saw it right off, Draco was too stressed to see it. And at first he thought he could do it - kill Dumbledore with a magic device, at a distance. Didn't work, of course. The other aspect of the plan for Voldemort was watching to see what Snape would do. I'm sure Voldemort knew about Narcissa's visit and the UV - after the fact. Snape would have to prove his loyalty by helping Draco the best he could. This would also be a good thing too. Having worked this out, I think Voldemort reached for a few sharp pencils, a week's supply of Times crossword puzzles and settled down to enjoy himself with one of those homey activities he'd missed so much in Albania when he didn't have usable arms or hands. So it was a win-win for Voldemort regardless of what happened. He'd punish the Malfoys and find out what Snape's loyalty situation really was. That Dumbledore would actually be killed - and by Snape! - was the one outcome Voldemort didn't expect. But, hey! You don't get to be the Dark Lord without knowing how to take advantage of unexpected surprises. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bawilson at citynet.net Sun May 14 23:42:52 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 19:42:52 -0400 Subject: Ginny's Behavior Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152249 Ceridwen: Ron, as her brother, will be more critical of her than anyone else. His underlying concern will also be more personal than another person's - the WW seems like a conservative society where things like this is concerned; he is trying to protect her reputation. True, he did it poorly. But, as you imply yourself, siblings have a special relationship. They will yell when they really only care. [snip] On who Bill decides to marry, Ginny has no business butting in. BAW: Hold up a moment! It is OK for a brother to object to whom his sister dates, but a sister must accept whom a brother hooks up with? Surely you can't mean anything so sexist. But, if not, what DO you mean? From elfundeb at gmail.com Mon May 15 02:04:05 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 22:04:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco In-Reply-To: References: <80f25c3a0605140329o630e7172re155f86409b7e6e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a0605141904g5118942cmada594ac4c7f346f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152250 Pippin wrote: Draco wasn't in charge of his assistants or he would have known Fenrir was coming. Since Draco didn't go to Hogsmeade, someone else had to have put Rosmera under the Imperius curse. All this suggests that someone other than Draco was in charge of the operation. Debbie: Perhaps I misspoke; my point was that Draco was in charge of the plan insofar as it involved the Vanishing Cabinets. As he says to Snape, he was *given* a job, but he *had* a plan. His plan was to get the DEs into Hogwarts; it wasn't his idea to set off the Dark Mark ("We decided to set the Dark Mark over the Tower"), though that was a last-minute impovisation necessitated by Dumbledore's absence from the school. Draco was not "in charge" of his assistants once they arrived, but they knew their roles: they were to protect Draco and leave Dumbledore's murder to him. And, of course, they were supposed to leave Harry alone, but I assume that is a standing order from Voldemort. We have no way of knowing whether Draco lied about whether Fenrir was included on the Hogwarts invitation list or not. I tend to think that Fenrir invited himself along to snack on some human flesh. Draco was evidently terrified of Fenrir, and so would not have made a fuss. He doesn't seem to be the sort of person one would ordinarily put on a team to provide cover. He doesn't use any spells on anyone while at Hogwarts; he's there for "the throats to be ripped out. . . delicious, delicious." In fact, when he attacks Harry, he makes himself an easy mark and he's lucky that the Order's idea of a potent curse is Petrificus Totalis. Fenrir is OFH! and he's too frightening and too disgusting for anyone to cross him. (IIRC, Voldemort recruited *him* as an ally, and not vice versa.) In any event, Fenrir was involved in the plan from the beginning: his job was to keep an eye on Mr Borgin to make sure he kept his mouth shut about the cabinets. Fenrir was the logical person for this job, since he evidently had a sufficient history of enjoying the pleasures of the flesh outside of his monthly transformations that the very mention of his name (along with the Dark Mark) was enough for Borgin to assure Draco that visits from Fenrir would not be necessary. Bottom line, Fenrir is OFH! and he's too frightening and too disgusting for anyone to cross him. (IIRC, Voldemort recruited *him* as an ally, and not vice versa.) Pippin: I'd guess the cabinets were part of the plan from the beginning. The first thing Draco does is ask Borgin for advice on how to fix the cabinet, and threaten him to make sure he doesn't sell the other one. The necklace and the mead are obtained later. Debbie: Certainly it was part of Draco's plan early on, but there's no canon on whether Voldemort knew about it, only inferences. We don't even know if Voldemort knew Draco intended to breach Hogwarts' security measures as part of his plan. Since Lucius was well acquainted with many DEs (Draco tells Mr Burgin that Fenrir is a family friend), Draco may have had the contacts to do the recruiting himself. Certainly it was clear that Draco wanted his plan kept quiet. His main concern was to keep Snape in the dark, but it seems to me that Draco wanted to unveil his plan only after it was successful. Pippin: It could be that Voldemort first ordered Draco to find a way to get DE's into Hogwarts, and when, to his astonishment, Draco produced one, he then involved Draco in the plot. Voldemort did not have Draco trained in killing, which shows that he never seriously expected Draco to kill. But getting the DE's into Hogwarts was obviously very important to him, and seems to me to have been aimed at getting Snape to burn his bridges. Debbie: The idea that Voldemort ordered Draco to get the DEs into Hogwarts, something no one else had figured out how to do, and Draco conveniently had a solution with a broken cabinet as the only obstacle, is too convenient for my taste. Your second thought makes much more sense to me; he wanted Dumbledore dead, and Snape himself expected that Voldemort intended him to do it in the end, thus removing Snape permanently from the soft Hogwarts environment, so he set Draco a task he doubted Draco could do. The bottom line is that there is very little in the way of uncontroverted facts, and no obvious way of interpreting the slender clues we do have. Everyone's filled in the gaps differently, and none of the scenarios are controverted by canon, and we may never learn which one JKR had in mind, which makes us all right. Debbie very tired now and probably rambling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 15 02:14:24 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 22:14:24 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) References: Message-ID: <007e01c677c5$4a0593e0$4c9e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152251 > Carol responds: > Problem: 1) and 2) are contradictory and cannot both be true. Magpie: Sorry, I said 1/2 because they both include Voldemort giving Draco the task to kill DD and Draco responding with the Cabinet plot. We don't know if Draco went to him or Voldemort called for Draco, and it's never much described as important. I'd say canon leans much more towards 1. Carol: But I've already cited the canon supporting my > chronology upthread, whereas you're deducing yours from the incomplete > information on which the adult characters base their assumptions. Magpie: Canon citation for this chronology is exactly what I haven't seen anywhere. You are making a claim to a certain thing happening in canon. Proving it, imo, would require some canon that references this scene as taking place. What we have in canon is Snape, Narcissa and Bellatrix all talking about how Draco has been given a task to kill DD because Voldemort is punishing Lucius and wants Draco to die. We have Draco impressing his friends with cryptic references to something Voldemort wants him to do. We have Draco working on the Cabinet plot, which gives him backup to kill DD. We have Dumbledore elaborating on how Lucius not only screwed up at the MoM, but destroyed Voldemort's Diary, putting him in Voldemort's bad graces. We have Snape agreeing to vow to watch over Draco and kill DD if it seems Draco will fail. Draco's being given this task without first coming up with a plan to get DEs into the castle never seems to be an issue for anyone in canon. In the end we wind up with Snape arriving in the Tower to find a bunch of DEs Draco's brought into the castle standing around urging Draco to kill a weakened DD. Snape is under a UV at this point to complete Draco's task--that task being kill Dumbledore. Fenrir has come with the DEs, and Draco says that's a surprise to him. Snape kills DD. All this happens after a long conversation between Dumbledore and Draco where much is explained--we get a lot of Draco's story that we couldn't see because we were in Harry's head. DD talks about his mental state, they go over Protego coins, Imperius by Rosemerta, the necklace, the mead. Draco tells us just how he came up with the idea for the Cabinet, starting back last year with Montague. At no time does anyone, including Draco when he tells the story of the Cabinet Plot, suggest that Draco originally had gone to Voldemort offering to create a portal into the school, which then gave Voldemort the idea to tell him to kill DD (somehow knowing that giving Draco that task along with the original plan to fix the cabinets would lead to the exact situation we find ourselves in in the Lightning Struck Tower). This is exactly the kind of thing the final conversation between Dumbledore and Draco is about, but it's not there. That's what I need for canon evidence that this took place. If we get that in Book VII I'll go with it. Imagining how things might have been from Voldemort's pov doesn't hold much water for me. It's true we're not privvy to what's going on on the Dark Side so we're often getting our information second hand, but in some instances this is why we need to pay more attention to what we get. I think JKR found ways of giving us the basics of the situation we were following the only way she could. -m From queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com Mon May 15 02:50:01 2006 From: queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com (Maria) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 02:50:01 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: <007e01c677c5$4a0593e0$4c9e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152252 > Magpie responds: > Sorry, I said 1/2 because they both include Voldemort giving Draco the task > to kill DD and Draco responding with the Cabinet plot. We don't know if > Draco went to him or Voldemort called for Draco, and it's never much > described as important. I'd say canon leans much more towards 1. First: I was under the impression, that since Lucius Malfoy's failure in OOTP, and subsequent imprisonment, was why Voldemort took in Draco as a Death Eater in the first place. Draco becoming a Death Eater so young was because Voldymort was a little ticked off with Lucius. Second: Draco doesn't seem all that confident enough throughout the book, sure he was keeping up a shield to ward off any suspicion of cowardice or just plain helplessness. And I'm not so sure Draco had gone to Voldemort to tell him about the cabinet plot. I reckon he would have been intimated to see the Dark Lord again, if he had already met the Dark Lord in the first place. I think Draco eventually told Snape. Draco was pretty reluctant to tell Snape anything but He wowould've caved in in the end. Remember he was still a 16 yr old boy. ~~~~Maria~~~~ Join TeaWithVoldy's LJ: keep yourself updated with HP art http://teawithvoldy.livejournal.com/profile From caiomhino at gmail.com Mon May 15 00:44:18 2006 From: caiomhino at gmail.com (Kevin Furey) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 17:44:18 -0700 Subject: Reparo Spell/Rita Skeeter a man/ the one who show magic later in life In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <570ecd1c0605141744k50498f8ax1843e1236ffd25a7@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152253 On 5/14/06, David wrote: > > Hi, > > Has there any been any reason given as to why one can't use the reparo > spell on broken wands or broken bones? > > Has the theory that Rita Skeeter is man, been discussed here? I > searched the messages best I could and didn't find anything. > > Has anyone brought up the idea that the one who JKR says will show > magic later in life, might be Uncle Dursley? Both wands and bones are organic matter, perhaps the Reparo spell is meant for inanimate nonorganic objects? I have no citations to offer for that, just a theory to answer your question. I doubt from the name or the context of the text that Rita is really a man. I don't remember any discussion on such, but I've only been reading the forum for a few months. Dursley seems to be very much a Muggle, but he also seems to be very much aware of the wizard world and trying to protect his family from it. He knows Harry is a wizard, powerful in his abilities. He obviously fears Harry, but he still took him in out of duty to his family. You could even say he tried to protect Harry from the wizarding world by trying to keep him out of Hogwarts, though more likely he was trying to protect his wife and son from the vengeance he knows is due should Harry become a powerful wizard. He may be a biased, unpleasant old fart, but he does seem to be a good provider and very loyal to his family. It wouldn't surprise me much if he does turn out to have some negative history with the wizarding world from before the time he met Petunia, indeed, there may be some wizarding connection that would explain how Petunia and he ended up with each other. I feel that he will always be a Muggle with no magic, and that Petunia will have the sudden blossoming of power that JKR hints at. Her hints are quite often misleading so I could be incredibally off mark with this line of reasoning. caiomhino. From queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com Mon May 15 03:19:51 2006 From: queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com (Maria) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 03:19:51 -0000 Subject: Reparo Spell/Rita Skeeter a man/ the one who show magic later in life In-Reply-To: <570ecd1c0605141744k50498f8ax1843e1236ffd25a7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152254 Kevin Furey: > Both wands and bones are organic matter, perhaps the Reparo spell is meant > for inanimate nonorganic objects? I have no citations to offer for that, > just a theory to answer your question. Yeah I agree with you. Not every spell in HP works for everything. Plus I don't think Reparo's been used to heal bones. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard only heal bones with Reparo. And yes you may be right, Reparo might only work for nonorganic stuff. Besides I think Healing spells used on bodies are different to the ones used on everything else, otherwise why have Healers in the first place? :P But is there a sort of time limit to how effectively a Reparo Spell works? For example will it work on a hole-filled jacket that hasn't been touched for many years, compared to a jacket that got hole only minutes before? Food for thought. ~~~~Maria~~~~ Join TeaWithVoldy's LJ: keep yourself updated with HP art http://teawithvoldy.livejournal.com/profile From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 15 04:00:46 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 04:00:46 -0000 Subject: Snogging and Love Potions wasRe: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152256 > > Potioncat: > > So does Confundus. So does Cheering Charms. They arent' sexual, > but > > they alter the mental state. > > a_svirn: > Love potions are sexual, however. Potioncat: So, you think they are dark because they have a sexual component, not because they alter the mental state? I thought it was your point that they altered the mental state that made them dark. > > > a_svirn: > Which brings us back to the definition of *dark*. If it's just > something classified as such by the Ministry, I rather think I agree > with Draco ? it's a bit of a joke. Potioncat: I don't think Dark is just classified by the Ministry. I think it's something the Wizarding culture understands, but we do not. I wonder sometimes if it's very clear to JKR and she has no idea we're all so confused by it. Of course it could be like RL issues. Drugs are bad...are we all agreed. Yes. Good...but some of don't think Pot should be illegal and some of us dont' think alcohol should be legal. And some of us agree that tobacco and coffee are drugs too, but they are good drugs. You know. We're both saying love potions are not good. We're really arguing over whether they are dark. And I think you come at from the extreme worst they can be while I'm looking at them from a more innocent approach. So if something like Confundus is not dark, I'm not sure why love potions should be. Although I would think the way Merope used it should be illegal, just like stabbing someone with a pencil would be illegal. > a_svirn: > Why do you think Merope's one was abnormal? Potioncat: I don't know if we're told what she uses. My point is that (IMO) love potions are supposed to be a once or twice sort of treatment---not along term use. They make you feel an attraction to someone, not take away all judgement. So she has used this potion much longer than she should have. But we really don't have canon to tell me if that would be the norm. > > > Potioncat: > > My thoughts were that a normal love potion would make you feel an > > attraction toward someone for a brief period of time. That seems > > harmless enough. > > a_svirn: > No, it doesn't. It means messing up with other people minds. What > you call "normal" potion is nothing but a weak solution of one. Potioncat: See, I'm thinking teenaged girl who is just going to die if that cute boy in 3rd period doesn't ask her out. She's tried perfume and changing her hair and wearing a different style dress and mentioning, within his hearing how much she likes (some event she knows he likes.) So now she tries a little shot of love potion. He sees her and asks her out. End of story. (Unless you're Merope who keeps on slipping it into his drink.) I understand your point too, though. > a_svirn: > And it wouldn't be bending him to her will?! Chaste or not it would > be up to her, I take it. He would have no saying at all. Potioncat: Sort of like when the gentleman offers the lady another class of wine? Well this tennis match has been fun, but we aren't getting anywhere and no one else seems to want to join in. (Unless I've missed a post.) But I'll toss out a question or two. Did Tom Riddle know Merope was pregnant? What should his responsibility toward the baby have been? Potioncat, who thinks a large part of her opinions have been formed by the song, "Love Potion Number 9" See, it never works out. From julcrybor at yahoo.com Mon May 15 02:06:00 2006 From: julcrybor at yahoo.com (crystal borden) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 19:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Possible Flint in HBP re the Invisibility Cloak? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060515020600.3904.qmail@web38212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152257 gelite67 wrote: >> At the beginning of HBP, DD tells Harry to keep his Invisibility Cloak with him at all times and Harry agrees to do it. Yet, after DD explains they are going Horcrux-Hunting, he instructs Harry to go get the cloak. (Chapter 25) The text does not say that Harry gets his cloak, but does tell us that Harry retrieve the Marauder's Map and Felix from his trunk, which he gives to Hermione and Ron. And, Harry tells them that DD "thinks" he is getting his cloak. Which, to me, implies that Harry, in fact, had the cloak all along. I'm confused. I can understand why Harry wanted DD to think he needed to retrieve his cloak, but I don't understand why, given that DD had instructed Harry to always carry the cloak and Harry agreed, why DD didn't ask Harry if he had the cloak or didn't assume that Harry had the cloak. << from julcrybor: I think DD knew that Harry was going to have Ron and Hermione keep watch when they left and knew what Harry had his suspicions of in regards to Draco, so he gave Harry the chance of an excuse to go tell Ron and Hermione because maybe he knew Harry wanted the peace of mind of them keeping watch and protecting the other students. DD knows more about what's going on than he lets on. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon May 15 13:20:05 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 06:20:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060515132005.44775.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152258 --- justcarol67 wrote: > I've already given my reasons for thinking that Draco must have > approached Voldemort with his Vanishing Cabinet idea, which I > understand that you disagree with, but I'm rather surprised that > you'd call them "unreasonable." I supported them with canon in > various points in the thread, and I've seen no canon yet to the > contrary. > > Again, Voldemort's motive of revenge against Lucius, which I've > conceded (or rather, never denied), does not in any way contradict > Draco's coming to Voldemort and Voldemort's taking advantage of > Draco's discovery. > > How about some canon to convince me that Voldemort came after > Draco? Well, for me it's a matter of believability: up to the end of OOTP, Draco is immature, hiding behind Crabbe and Goyle for physical protection almost always, striking from behind, always looking out for a teacher, waving the banner of "my father says..." at every opportunity and being surprised that no one else seems to be impressed by it. This is not a kid who's going to come up with a scheme of any kind and take the initiative to approach Voldemort with it. And from what we know of Voldemort, he doesn't strike me as exactly encouraging of initiative amongs his followers in the first place. Lord Voldemort gives the orders, others obey. We know from Chapter 2 that Voldemort is very angry about the MOM cock-up (and from what we know of Voldemort anyway, is this surprising?) and we also find out that Voldemort was livid when he found out what happened to the Riddle diary - one of his precious horcruxes. So he's got a strong anti-Malfoy feeling right now, and he can't get his hands on Lucius. I don't think Voldemort "came after" Draco: I think he commanded Narcissa and Draco into his presence and laid down his commandment: kill Dumbledore or your family dies. It's the kind of sadistic thing he'd do - making it Draco's "fault" if his failure results in his family's murders. So for me, a big obstacle towards seeing Draco as the prime mover is that it contradicts both personalities - as we've seen them so far. Draco grows up fast and hard in HBP, but there's no sign in the summer that this has happened yet. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 15 14:33:17 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 14:33:17 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: <20060515132005.44775.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152259 Magpie: > Well, for me it's a matter of believability: up to the end of OOTP, > Draco is immature, hiding behind Crabbe and Goyle for physical > protection almost always, striking from behind, always looking out > for a teacher, waving the banner of "my father says..." at every > opportunity and being surprised that no one else seems to be > impressed by it. This is not a kid who's going to come up with a > scheme of any kind and take the initiative to approach Voldemort with > it. Pippin: The vanishing cabinet is a strike from behind idea. But we do see in canon the moment when Draco tells Harry that Harry is going to pay. That's played up as a significant deepening of Draco's hostility. He's gone far beyond trying to get Harry in trouble for breaking rules. After the ambush at the end of OOP fails, he sees that he needs backup. But how to get it? I can see Draco approaching Voldemort thinking that the vc's could be used against *Harry.* Perhaps he approached Auntie Bella with his brilliant idea, and she, being in need of a way to redeem herself in her master's eyes, brought him before Voldemort. She wouldn't be able to use the idea herself because she doesn't have access to Hogwarts and she can't very well show up in Knockturn Alley either. But of course Voldemort comes up with one of his usual needlessly elaborate schemes, both to punish the Malfoy family and to put Snape on the spot. Draco must forget his childish rivalry with Potter, that jumped up halfblood who owes his successs only to luck and clever friends. There is a more important target for Draco. Thus the Plan. But Draco must first learn enough occlumency to conceal his purposes from the Order, because Knockturn Alley could be watched. That would be why Draco doesn't make his appearance there until term is almost ready to start. Pippin From phoenixtears at fuse.net Mon May 15 15:40:58 2006 From: phoenixtears at fuse.net (phoenixmum) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 15:40:58 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152260 Geoff Bannister wrote: > Reading between the lines, I get a feeling that Viktor > Krum was not a Karkaroff fan. A follow-up question > would be, that although IK is or was a Death Eater, > is there a pureblood restriction on entry to the school? > Phoenix answers: In GOF (US ed.), p. 165 Malfory states "...Father actually considered sending me to Durmstrang...He knows the Headmaster, you see. Well you know his opinion of Dumbledore- the man's such a Mudblood lover- and Durmstang doesn't admit that sort of riff-raff." Of course, just because it's school policy, it doesn't mean all the students believe in it. Look at the Hogwarts students who think only purebloods should be permitted. I thought one of the points of Krum taking Hermione to the ball, and their continued correspondence, was to set up Krum's return as an ally in Harry's quest against Voldemort in the last book. The fact that Krum would take a mudblood to the ball, and apparently genuinely cares for her despite knowing she is muggle-born, sets him up as a good guy by the end of GOF. Krum is from Bulgaria, LV hid in Romania for a while; perhaps there's a horcrux, or a clue to one in that part of the world, and Harry will need to travel there. Hermione's friendship with Krum would give them a contact in that part of the world. From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 15 16:06:19 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 16:06:19 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152261 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Magpie: > > Well, for me it's a matter of believability: up to the end of OOTP, > > Draco is immature, hiding behind Crabbe and Goyle for physical > > protection almost always, striking from behind, always looking out > > for a teacher, waving the banner of "my father says..." at every > > opportunity and being surprised that no one else seems to be > > impressed by it. This is not a kid who's going to come up with a > > scheme of any kind and take the initiative to approach Voldemort with > > it. > > Pippin: > The vanishing cabinet is a strike from behind idea. But we do see > in canon the moment when Draco tells Harry that Harry is going to > pay. That's played up as a significant deepening of Draco's hostility. > He's gone far beyond trying to get Harry in trouble for breaking > rules. > > After the ambush at the end of OOP fails, he sees that he needs > backup. But how to get it? > > I can see Draco approaching Voldemort thinking that the vc's > could be used against *Harry.* Perhaps he approached > Auntie Bella with his brilliant idea, and she, being in need of a way > to redeem herself in her master's eyes, brought him before Voldemort. > She wouldn't be able to use the idea herself because she doesn't > have access to Hogwarts and she can't very well show up in Knockturn > Alley either. > > But of course Voldemort comes up with one of his usual needlessly > elaborate schemes, both to punish the Malfoy family and > to put Snape on the spot. Draco must forget his childish rivalry > with Potter, that jumped up halfblood who owes his successs only > to luck and clever friends. There is a more important target > for Draco. Thus the Plan. > > But Draco must first learn enough occlumency to conceal his > purposes from the Order, because Knockturn Alley could be watched. > That would be why Draco doesn't make his appearance there > until term is almost ready to start. Magpie: Just because I'm anal, that part above is not actually me. I think it was Magda (understandable mistake--the name's pretty close!) talking about Draco's personality not fitting his going to Voldemort. Personally, while I think Voldemort simply came up with the assignment to kill DD and gave it to Draco, I do think that Draco's threats at the end of OotP represent a deepening of hostility and are there to foreshadow his story in HBP. It's not that I think it's impossible that Draco could come up with a plan to get Harry (though I actually don't really think the Cabinet Plot fits that--if Draco was bent on getting Harry I can't really imagine him saying he needs a crowd of grown ups to do it) or that Voldemort would then turn it around to do something else with it. I just see no evidence that any such thing happened in HBP. To me it seems like the things link up in a more general, straightforward way: Draco ends OotP feeling impotent and furious and wanting to get involved--that probably starts earlier when the DE kids are looking at the newspaper etc. I wondered in that book if JKR was showing us signs of those kids starting to feel like they needed to act on behalf of their families and I now do think that was the idea. But I think HBP shows that Draco's rage at the end of OotP channels itself into a desire to be a good DE. If Draco had come up with a plan to get Harry that Voldemort turned to his own ends I think that would be important enough to Draco's arc that we'd have to see some references to it. -m From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 15 17:02:02 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 17:02:02 -0000 Subject: Draco and Snape Re: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152262 >Carol wrote: > 8) Why does Draco claim to be "gate-crashing" when he was actually > upstairs? Why does he look angry when Slughorn allows him to stay? The > narrator, voicing Harry's perspective, asks: "Why was Snape looking at > Malfoy as though both angry and . . . was it possible? . . . a little > afraid?" How would you answer the narrator's (or Harry's) questions? Potioncat: Draco was found upstairs, out of bounds. He gave a resonable explantaion, "I was going to the party." It seems those students who were not at the party should have been back in their common rooms by this time. I think he was hoping Filch would fall for it and let him be. (Odd isn't it, the two of them were pretty happy to support Umbridge. You'd expect Filch to look the other way.) He didn't want to be taken to the party and he didn't want to stay there. Snape knows Draco was up to something. Draco's actions are putting several lives at risk, to Snape's way of thinking. > > 9) How do you account for the change in his attitude > toward his Head of House and former favorite professor? What > parallels, if any, do you see between this relationship and Harry's > with Dumbledore? Potioncat: I think it's a combination of being a teenager, not wanting to need an adult's help and having this incredible task ahead of him. I'm not sure if Draco has been threatened yet. He was full of himself at the beginning of the fall term. Now he doesn't seem so confident. I suspect he hasn't yet been on the carpet yet...but will over the Holidays. I think it will either be Christmas or Easter holiday that LV will actually say, if you don't succeed, your family dies. 10) Clearly, Crabbe and Goyle are not taking NEWT DADA with Harry and > Draco. Might they be repeating fifth-year DADA (rather than taking no > DADA class at all), and could they, theoretically, repeat their DADA > OWLs as Snape implies? What, if anything, does this detail tell us > about Snape's attitude toward DADA? Is he really concerned about > Crabbe's and Goyle's DADA OWLs? What is he trying to accomplish by > putting them in detention? Potioncat: Remember how we used to wonder what classes Fred and George were taking? I'm wondering if there are some classes you have to repeat if you don't pass the OWL? Would that fit at all with the English system? Or would you possibly continue taking the next year's class if you didn't pass the OWL? I think he was trying to limit the amount of time C&G could help Draco. > > 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt at > Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his > accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? How successful are > his attempts to evade Snape's questions? What, if anything, does Snape > learn from Draco's answers? Potioncat: I wondered if all Slytherins felt that way? If so, why the enthusiasm for Snape becoming DADA Professor? Draco may believe that Snape is out for the glory. Particularly if he is at all close to Aunt Bellatrix. Snape may have understood, as I did not, that Draco was getting help from the DE ranks. > I was surprised that Snape brought up the UV. If we are correct, Snape has just said, "I've promised my life for you." Draco doesn't seem too grateful. Now I'm taken by the image of Snape offering to be a sacrifice for Draco, but DD actually taking that place. > > 13) Snape's expression is twice referred to as "unfathomable" or > "inscrutable." What does this description suggest to you? Why does > Snape return to the party rather than following Draco? Potioncat: Draco's party crashing cannot seem like more than that. It apears to Slughorn that Snape intended to discipline Draco for his behavior. Snape would be expected to return. Upthread someone mentioned Snape's line, "What thoughts are you trying to conceal from your master, Draco?" This comes just after Draco accuses Snape of Legilimency. I've always taken the question to mean, "What are you hiding from me?" Master in this case being teacher. Draco thinks, or twists it to mean, that Snape means LV. But what if Snape is suggesting that Draco is learning Occlumency to hide his thoughts from LV? Does anyone think Bellatrix is using Occlumency around the Dark Lord? > > 14) How did this chapter affect your views on where Snape's loyalties > lie? Why do you think the chapter is titled "The Unbreakable Vow" when > the vow is barely mentioned? Potioncat: It's the first Harry learns of it. Once again, I have to say I really noticed the chapter titles before and while I was reading. I expected an outcome to the vow at that point. But what really jumped out at me was the image of Harry listening at keyholes...just like Snape had done. Oh one more thought. Harry gathers Hermione's things from Transfiguration class, including a pencil box. Pencil boxes came up once before and lead to the theory that another Gryffindor girl was Muggle-born. Why would a witch need a pencil? So do you think Hermione is Muggle-born.....no, wait. That won't do. The students write with quills. Would the pencil box be for artist pencils (drafting pencils, whatever you call them) for illustrations? Potioncat, who still thinks the "to the hospital wing in a matchbox" was a dead give-a-way that Snape had a Muggle background. (Yeah, like I knew it all the time.) Very nice discussion, Carol. I'm glad I made through before the next one came out. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon May 15 17:05:28 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 17:05:28 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Plan for Draco ... (wasRe: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152263 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "festuco" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > > Magpie: > > Which is exactly what the plan is supposed to be, as we are > > told in canon. It is not supposed to be a success. Voldemort's > > plan is for Draco to die, not for Dumbledore to die at the hand > > of Draco. There is not "an element" of vengeance, the plan is > >about vengeance. > > Gerry > Are we told that? Or is that Narcissa who is desperate for her > little boy? Does Narcissa even know that Draco has found a way > into Hogwarts? > > ...I think it would have come up in the conversation at Spinner's > End. ... we are all supposed to think ... LV revenging himself > on Lucius. But what if ... this is the first time LV can get > somebody ... in DD's proximity for a prolonged time? ... Combined > with the vanishing cabinet I'm sure LV sees these opportunities. > ,,, > > There were other DE's involved in the MoM fiasco, remember. Is > he going to take revenge on all their families? That is one sure > way for creating a huge risk that one of them will defect to > protect them. Now he is vengeful, but I don't believe he is stupid. > > Gerry > bboyminn: Surprise, surprires, I'm with Gerry on this one. I think way too much is being made of the 'Revenge against the Malfoys' angle. First and foremost, if Voldemort truly wants vengence or revenge, why doesn't he just take it? Why this wacky scheme involving Draco? If we look at this chronologically, the first event that occurs is Draco realizing that the Vanishing Cabinet represents a way into the school. THAT is why I use that as my starting point, because it is the first usable piece of information available. The next logical step is for smarmy Draco to present this information to Voldemort. The next logical step is that Voldemort hands Draco far more than Draco bargained for. I suspect Draco has delusions that he can be a DE and still keep his hands clean. Surprise, surprise. Voldemort could have accepted just the access to the Castle part of the plan, and still accomplished his goal, but his vengence is to give Draco the addition impossible task of killing Dumbledore. I seriously doubt that he expexted Draco to be capable of doing this, but it had the added benefit of tormenting all of he Malfoys. I did acknowledge that the pressure being put on Draco, and the danger he is under, have the additional benefit of tormenting Draco's parents. Further, Voldemort torments Draco by threatening his parents. That is an added benefit to Voldemort, and a great worry for Narcissa and Lucius. Everybody is tormented; Voldemort is happy. But never before has Voldemort been able to get his DE's so close to Dumbledore and pull off a suprirse attack. That is the value of the Vanishing Cabinets, and that is the core of the plan. Tormenting the Malfoys is merely an added benefit. Once again, I ask, why concoct such an unlikely and wacky plan as merely telling Draco to kill Dumbledore. It makes much more sense to have a real plan with some potential for success and then to compound that basic plan than to start with a completely unlikely and impossible plan. If Voldemort truly wanted vengence against the Malfoys, he wouldn't waste his time with wacky schemes, he would just take his vengence and be done with it. The first event to occur and the seed of 'The Plan' is Draco realizing the potential of the Vanishing Cabinets. So, that is where I start. Others don't have to agree, but then neither do I. Steve/bboyminn From scrisoareaatreia at yahoo.fr Mon May 15 12:16:49 2006 From: scrisoareaatreia at yahoo.fr (smaranda ionesco) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 14:16:49 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Teaching is not a popularity contest. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060515121649.31288.qmail@web27604.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152264 Leslie41: >> But Rowling doesn't "approve" of Snape's behavior. When asked why Dumbledore allows Snape to teach, she basically said that "there are all sorts of lessons in life; horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!" Snape's behavior towards children is at the very least mean- spirited, but one of the lessons children learn from Rowling is that mean-spirited teachers and students and all sorts of other people exist in the world, and they don't always receive the punishment we think they should. << BAW: >> I had a teacher somewhat like Snape once. But, for all his faults, his students LEARNED THE SUBJECT. The man I am thinking of frequently was heard to say, "Teaching is not a popularity contest." So, while given a choice between a nice and effective teacher and a mean and effective one, I'd certainly choose the former. But between a nice but ineffective teacher and a nasty but effective one, I'd probably choose the latter. << scrisoareaatreia (scrisoareaatreia at yahoo.fr) wrote : I can't believe we are still discussing Snape's teaching methods when we had UMBRIDGE as a counter-example. She manhandled Marietta, forced Harry to etch lines in his own flesh, tried to give him Veritaserum, was about to Crucio him, and had sent Dementors after him ! And she had no intention to teach anything useful to anyone. Snape may not be pleasant, but he never laid hands on a student, never caused them any physical harm, not even any durable psychological harm (Neville is coming along nicely, and I think that having survived Snape is a victory for him and contributes to his increasing self-confidence). Even his nastier remarks are based on (unpleasant) truths : Harry is famous without having really earned it, Neville is a dunderhead, Hermione's teeth are too big (and after that infamous reply, she wakes at last to the fact that outward appearance is important). And of course he's competent in his subject matter, and he's even an efficient teacher considering that Harry who hates him and hates the subject manages still an "exceeds expectations". From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon May 15 17:25:31 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 17:25:31 -0000 Subject: Possible Flint in HBP re the Invisibility Cloak? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152265 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > > At the beginning of HBP, DD tells Harry to keep his Invisibility > Cloak with him at all times and Harry agrees to do it. > > Yet, after DD explains they are going Horcrux-Hunting, he instructs > Harry to go get the cloak. (Chapter 25) > > The text does not say that Harry gets his cloak, but does tell us > that Harry retrieve the Marauder's Map and Felix from his trunk, > which he gives to Hermione and Ron. ... > > I'm confused. ... I don't understand why, given that DD had > instructed Harry to always carry the cloak and Harry agreed, > why DD didn't ask Harry if he had the cloak or didn't assume > that Harry had the cloak. ... > > Any thoughts? > bboyminn: I think Dumbledore is just giving Harry an excuse to take care of any last minute details. Rather than telling Harry to get his I-cloak, Dumbledore could just as easily have asked Harry if he had his I-cloak with him. So what Dumbledore is really doing, in my view, is giving Harry a few minutes to prepare before they leave the castle. Also, Dumbledore may have needed a few minute to do one thing or another himself (bathroom break?). I think that's all it is, Dumbledore's indirect way of giving Harry some time to take care of any last minute details, like telling Hermione and Ron where he was going. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 15 17:35:53 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 17:35:53 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Plan for Draco ... (wasRe: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152266 > bboyminn: > > Surprise, surprires, I'm with Gerry on this one. I think way too much > is being made of the 'Revenge against the Malfoys' angle. First and > foremost, if Voldemort truly wants vengence or revenge, why doesn't he > just take it? Why this wacky scheme involving Draco? Magpie: It's hardly "making too much" of the revenge on the Malfoys to point out that according to canon it's the plot of the book. Why does Voldemort come up with a wacky scheme involving Draco? Perhaps because that's what Voldemort does? Why not just hand Harry a Portkey in GoF? Because Voldemort is an evil overlord and so prone to the normal flaws of evil overlords: he comes up with overcomplicated plots where simple ones would do, the kind that suggest he likes watching people suffer for a long time in his elaborate scheme, and allows for many things to go wrong and for the heroes to surprise him. Steve: > > If we look at this chronologically, the first event that occurs is > Draco realizing that the Vanishing Cabinet represents a way into the > school. THAT is why I use that as my starting point, because it is the > first usable piece of information available. The next logical step is > for smarmy Draco to present this information to Voldemort. Magpie: Unfortunately you are not writing smarmy Draco's story so what you think the next logical step is doesn't matter unless it's in canon, which it isn't. There's nothing illogical about Draco figuring out the Cabinet is a way into Hogwarts, and not having a way to use this to his advantage until Voldemort tells him to kill Dumbledore. It's even in character. Steve: The next > logical step is that Voldemort hands Draco far more than Draco > bargained for. I suspect Draco has delusions that he can be a DE and > still keep his hands clean. Surprise, surprise. Magpie: Yes, quite a surprise given that canon directly contradictions this suspicion by having Draco becoming a DE by being given a task to get his hands dirty and Draco seeing this as the way to do it. Steve: But never > before has Voldemort been able to get his DE's so close to Dumbledore > and pull off a suprirse attack. That is the value of the Vanishing > Cabinets, and that is the core of the plan. Tormenting the Malfoys is > merely an added benefit. Magpie: Because...you say it is? Because according to all the characters who actually know Voldemort he's given Draco a task to kill Dumbledore to punish Lucius. To use your own brand of logic, the one where Voldemort is an efficient villain mostly interested in killing Dumbledore and Draco's squirming is just an added benefit, it's a bit odd that he sends the DEs with Orders not to actually touch Dumbledore because Draco is supposed to do it, and not tell Snape, his agent in Hogwarts, about the plan at all. Canon offers up the possibility that Snape's only killing Dumbledore because of his own vow to Narcissa. Steve:> > Once again, I ask, why concoct such an unlikely and wacky plan as > merely telling Draco to kill Dumbledore. It makes much more sense to > have a real plan with some potential for success and then to compound > that basic plan than to start with a completely unlikely and > impossible plan. If Voldemort truly wanted vengence against the > Malfoys, he wouldn't waste his time with wacky schemes, he would just > take his vengence and be done with it. Magpie: Once again, I direct you to Harry Potter books 1-6, specifically book IV, the book with the unlikely and wacky plan that includes Harry having to win a contest for which he should be completely unqualified in order to get to the place Voldemort actually wants him. And also Book VI, which includes an entire plot about Voldemort merely telling Draco to kill Dumbledore and the way other people in the universe react to this plan. It's the book with the theme about murder splitting the soul and all that. I've got no problem with criticizing the plot of the book and saying Voldemort is an inefficient villain, but you can't write in scenes or ideas that aren't there to make it more personally satisfying. Well, you can, but canon has more weight. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 18:02:48 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:02:48 -0000 Subject: The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. (Was: Snogging and Love Potions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152267 Potioncat wrote: > See, I'm thinking teenaged girl who is just going to die if that cute boy in 3rd period doesn't ask her out. She's tried perfume and changing her hair and wearing a different style dress and mentioning, within his hearing how much she likes (some event she knows he likes.) So now she tries a little shot of love potion. He sees her and asks her out. End of story. Carol responds: Here, Potioncat. I'll join your tennis match--which may not be to your advantage considering how vehemently some of my opinions have been rejected lately. I agree that JKR sees most love potions (Amortentia excepted) as essentially innocent, like most of the Weasley Twins' products and jokes. (The reader may not necessarily share this view, but I'm talking about JKR's apparent intention.) We have the whole problem of what is considered acceptable and normal in the WW in contrast to the RW, for example hexes and jinxes, all of which impose the will of someone else on the victim (Did Crabbe ask to have his toenails ridiculously elongated? Did Neville ask to be turned into a canary, even briefly, by a Canary Cream? Did McLaggen ask to be Confunded?) and which have no equivalent in our world, where kids don't hex one another in the hallways or hit Bludgers at each other's heads or chase Blast-Ended Skrewts as a "lesson" in COMC or face dragons and other deadly perils in the name of international cooperation. In the WW, an ordinary love potion like those sold by the Weasley Twins (cunningly disguised as perfumes or cough potions) is no more dangerous and no more of an imposition on the victim than, say, Levicorpus, which was a fad in MWPPS's fifth year, or Petrificus Totalus, which even first-years use on each other (Hermione uses it on Neville) or turning a student into a ferret. The student who gets through Hogwarts without having someone else's will imposed on him (not counting homework assignments and detentions) does not exist. IMO, we need to consider that Romilda Vane and her friends are fourteen-year-old girls who aren't trying to seduce Harry, just trying to get him to ask them to a party. If they get lucky, he might kiss them under the mistletoe, a thrill for them, a possible embarrassment to him but one he'll get over. The infatuation caused by a love potion like the one in the chocolate cauldrons is not permanent, and even one that's out of date (and multiplied by the number of candies the boy ate, which IIRC in Ron's case was four) is easily countered by a simple antidote. All the potion does is temporarily cause a boy to make a fool of himself over a girl he normally wouldn't look at twice, hardly an experience that will cause post-traumatic stress syndrome in a world like the WW, where being made to look ridiculous is almost as common an experience as being put into danger, which happens every day in almost every class, even the innocent-seeming Herbology. I think the fact that Ginny, Hermione, and Mrs. Weasley giggled together over love potions, along with Hermione's comment that love potions aren't "Dark" and wouldn't be detected by a Secrecy Sensor, is meant to indicate that their use by teenage girls is regarded in the WW as silly but innocuous, the same attitude that Ron and Harry take toward Puking Pastilles and Fainting Fancies being tested on first years. I don't approve of the Twins' conduct, or Romilda's, but I don't think these misdemeanors are any worse than Harry using LangLock(sp?), the tongue-locking curse, on the defenseless Filch. That, too, is an imposition, as is Hermione Confunding McLaggen and Ginny throwing a Bat-Bogey hex at Zacharias Smith because he annoyed her, or James hexing people in the hallways.) If love potions are "Dark," why isn't Veritaserum, which forces a person to tell the truth, regarded as Dark? Or Legilimency, used by Albus Dumbledore, the "epitome of goodness," as well as by the evil Voldemort and the morally ambiguous Snape? Compared to those things, a love potion in a box of chocolates given by a teenage girl to a teenage boy with the simple intention of getting him to ask her for a single date seems fairly innocuous, at least to me. (We're talking about sexually inexperienced kids, none of whom has gone beyond "snogging," which fortunately has no permanent effects, not even, apparently, ruining a girl's reputation, if we can judge from Lavender's behavior.) It might be different if a boy used a love potion on a girl, and certainly if he wanted something more than "snogging" from an otherwise unwilling girl it would be reprehensible. (Sorry, Lupinlore. Your favorite word is the one that came to mind.) There's a reason why girls can enter the boys' dormitories but boys can't enter the girls' dorms, as Ron finds out when he tries to run up the girls' stairs. But these are children's books, and JKR's very young girls aren't seducing boys, nor are they in any danger of getting themselves pregnant, as JKR has made clear in an interview. (Fortunately, the boys involved are sexually inexperienced and still getting over their fear of girls and the misconception that girls belong to a different species. It would be a serious mistake to give a box of potioned chocolates to, say, McLaggen.) As for Merope (who, I agree, must be giving Tom Sr. repeated doses of the love potion to sustain his "love"), I feel nothing but pity for her. She has been treated all her life with abuse and contempt, and she thinks she loves the handsome young Muggle on the hill. For her, it's like a fairy tale. All she has to do is give him a bit of love potion and they'll live happily ever after. (I don't know where or how she learned to make a love potion, but I suppose we just have to accept that one on faith.) She certainly never learned any ethical principles, such as respect for the rights of others, and she probably convinces herself that she's doing nothing wrong--rather like Regulus, who joined the Death Eaters and realized too late that he had made a terrible mistake. IMO, she wasn't thinking of what she was doing in terms of seduction at all, much less rape. She simply wanted happiness and love, both of which had been denied her. She would have been happy for the first time in her life, told she was beautiful and kissed and caressed for the first time in her life, and it would have been hard to give that up, even if she knew in her heart that he didn't really love her and that she had trapped him into marriage against his will. It took a real act of courage, IMO, to stop giving him the potion and admit that she was a witch, and it must have broken her heart to realize that he not only hated and rejected her but wanted nothing to do with their unborn child. Potioncat: > But I'll toss out a question or two. Did Tom Riddle know Merope was > pregnant? What should his responsibility toward the baby have been? Carol: If Merope had any sense at all, she would have waited to tell him until the pregnancy was obvious so that he couldn't claim that she was lying about carrying his child. That being the case, no matter how much he hated and rejected her, he ought at least to have had some concern for the unborn baby once he recovered from the initial shock and humiliation. He could, and IMO, should have made some sort of arrangement so that his innocent child, his legal offspring whether he liked it or not, had some share of his wealth and at least the necessities of life. It is never right or justifiable, IMO, to condemn our own child to a life of poverty and rejection even if we were tricked into fathering or conceiving that child if it is in our power to prevent that from happening. Nor do I think that Merope should have been punished so severly for a mistake that she regretted and tried to remedy. She needed mercy (which is by definition unmerited) and received none. Her plight was far worse than Tom's, and a good man would have realized that and made provisions for her and her child. Instead, he never made inquiries after either of them, allowing her to die in misery and his child to grow up unloved and unacknowledged. (I am *not* saying that he deserved to be murdered by the son he rejected or punished in any way, only that he was as much in the wrong as Merope. Two wrongs don't make a right.) Throughout history, both men and women have been forced into unwanted marriages as a result of the custom of arranged marriage, the parents (or often just the fathers) choosing the prospective wife or husband for their children. However the bride and groom felt about the marriage, it was their responsibility to raise any resulting children to the best of their ability. The woman (or girl) would have no choice but to give birth to the child, but the duty and obligation to care for it belonged to both parents. Merope is in the position of a female rape victim who "asked for it." She's now rejected, penniless, helpless. Even if she retains her magic, she can't conjure food or money (as DD, IMO, whould have pointed out to Harry). Nor can she live on rats like the Animagus Sirius Black, and it would appear that she has no education and no marketable skills. Her position, regardless of the fact that it's her own fault, is IMO wholly pitiable, and her unborn baby's is worse. (It doesn't matter that he's the future Voldemort and the WW would be better off if his mother had died before he was born. The characters are not in a position to know that.) I realize that Tom Sr. would have been horrified to discover that he's married to a girl he would consider a hag, wall-eyed and homely and wholly unsuitable to a young man who had dreamed of marrying a pretty girl in his own social class. Since he probably can't get either an annulment or a divorce, his marital prospects are destroyed. Nevertheless, he has fathered a child and he has the same moral obligation as any other unwilling father, or any rape victim mother, to provide for that child to the best of his ability. And Tom's ability goes far beyond Merope's. He has plenty of money, and he could easily do as the upperclass fathers of "natural" (illegitimate) children did in the Middle Ages--provide a nice little home and an adequate income to the mother during the child's minority. Of course, that little home was generally far away from the father's house, as it certainly would be in this case. Yes, Tom Sr. is a victim (not so much of "rape" as of an inescapable marriage, which IMO is a much bigger deal to a young man of his social class), but so is the unloved and abused and rejected Merope, and so, above all, is her unborn child. It's just possible that if he had grown up knowing who he was, loved by his mother and acknowledged and provided for if not loved by his father, he might not have become the most evil wizard of all time. He might, at least, have been more susceptible to Dumbledore's influence. And even if that isn't the case, Tom Sr. had no way of knowing what the child he had fathered would become. Regardless of his own status as victim, he had no right to reject his unborn child when Merope clearly had no means of providing for him (and her ability to do magic would not have been a sufficient excuse; he had seen how she lived with her father and must have known that he would be condemning his child to grow up as another Merope or Morfin if it remained with its mother, unacknowledged and unaided by him). Carol, knowing that she's once again taking an unpopular stand that will be regarded as "wrong" by three-quarters of the list members From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 18:23:19 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:23:19 -0000 Subject: The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. (Was: Snogging and Love Potions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152268 Potioncat: > But I'll toss out a question or two. Did Tom Riddle know Merope was > pregnant? What should his responsibility toward the baby have been? Alla: I changed my mind, Potioncat. I will answer on list. I don't think we had been given the exact answer whether Tom knew or not that Merope was pregnant, but if he knew my answer as to his responsibility towards the baby is NONE, absolutely none. Since I absolutely view what Merope did to Tom as analogy to rape (even if it was not physically brutal, it was still rape IMO, since while in his right mind Tom wanted nothing to do with Merope and was forced to have sex with her), I do not think that rape victim should be forced to have anything to do with the baby conceived as a result of such rape. I feel SO bad for Tom and get very angry when I think about what Merope did. She WAS the victim of abuse, no question about it. Does it give her the right to commit crime? Not in my book. Carol: It is never right or justifiable, IMO, to condemn our own child to a life of poverty and rejection even if we were tricked into fathering or conceiving that child if it is in our power to prevent that from happening. Alla: IMO neither man nor woman should ever be forced to do with the child conceived under such horrible circumstances. Would it be great if they managed to overcome their own trauma and love such child? Absolutely, but if they cannot, I think it is their absolute right to not have anything to do with their aggressor or the child and yes, in this circumstances in my book "gentle", abused Merope is an aggressor, because she forced this man to sleep with her against her will. Carol: Merope is in the position of a female rape victim who "asked for it." She's now rejected, penniless, helpless. Alla: I thought Tom was in the victim's position, personally. Carol: I realize that Tom Sr. would have been horrified to discover that he's married to a girl he would consider a hag, wall-eyed and homely and wholly unsuitable to a young man who had dreamed of marrying a pretty girl in his own social class. Alla: I think he was just horrified to discover that he was forced to sleep with girl he did not want to sleep with, for months. Carol, knowing that she's once again taking an unpopular stand that will be regarded as "wrong" by three-quarters of the list members Alla: I have no right to say that anybody is right or wrong in their positions. But I do find your position to be very different from mine, that's true. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon May 15 18:32:27 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:32:27 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152269 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy Hp: > ...edited... > > ...edited... > > I also question the supposition that Draco had the Vanishing Cabinet > plan in mind from the moment of recieving the assignment. Why on > earth would he wait an entire summer before approaching Borgin about > how to fix the cabinet? For that matter, why would he wait (and why > would Voldemort *let him wait*) to prevent Borgin from selling the > Cabinet in the store? > > For that matter, it doesn't make sense that Draco knew about the > Cabinets until the summer. Montague wasn't talking when he first > came out of the cabinet. And he was whisked off campus before he > made a recovery. > bboyminn: Look at the timing of this. You said yourself that Draco was not likely to be able to talk to Montague until after the end of the school year. So, it takes Draco a bit of time to realize the value of what he has concluded that no one else seems to see. The Cabinets are a way of getting into the Castle undetected. Now more time passes as Draco tries to indirectly relay this information to Voldemort. Draco's father, possibly his mother, his Aunt, and his aunts husband and brother-in-law are Death Eaters, plus Draco probably knows many other DE's. It wouldn't be that hard to get a message to Voldemort. If Draco has a secret way into the Castle, I think Voldemort would want to talk to him about it. More time passes, the plan is created and Draco is a Borgin's right on schedule, asking for information on fixing the broken cabinet, and telling Borgin not to sell the mating cabinet. I really don't see any chronological discontinuity there, every thing seem right on schedule. I still claim that knowledge of the Cabinet is the start of everything. > > Betsy Hp: > ... The moment Voldemort starts going all out, he cooks up a > plan to kill Dumbledore, and Snape is the assassin. Draco is a > distraction and a nicely cruel way to punish a naughty Death Eater. > bboyminn: Actually, on this one point, I can somewhat agree with you. It's just the details getting to this one point that we differ on. I still say the Voldemort is always planning and scheming to kill Dumbledore, but can never come up with an effective and likely way of doing it. Draco provides a method of attacking Dumbledore, and the plan proceeds from there. > Betsy Hp: > I agree with Magpie, there doesn't seem to be any point to getting > the Death Eaters into Hogwarts except as backup for Draco. ... > > bboyminn: I've already said this in another post in this thread, but it bares repeating. If Voldemort wants to punish the Malfoys, he will just punish them rather that resorting to a long drawn out wacky scheme. The 'Plan' makes no sense as punishment since Voldemort is constantly punishing people all the time for reasons large and small. It only makes sense if the 'tormenting the Malfoys' aspect is a secondary part of a much better, more effective and productive plan. I think you are likely right, Draco was merely a distraction, but Draco getting DE's into the castle is important and critical. Further once in the Castle, Draco become irrelavant, Snape or other DE's can attempt to kill Dumbledore. As to why Snape hasn't killed Dumbledore in the past, that was not his job. Voldemort sent Snape to Dumbledore as a spy; unknow to Voldemort Snape turned spy for Dumbledore. It's is conceivable that Voldemort eventually planned to have Snape kill Dumbledore, but he was vaporized before he could give that order. Now he is only recently back, and needs to know what the Ministry and Dumbledore know, and what they are doing to thwart him. Snape at this time is more valuable as a spy than Dumbledore is dead. In the most recent book however, Voldemort is out in the open creating chaos in the world. Voldemort's confidence is growing, he sees his old power returing, he sees that now, at this point when Voldemort is ready to regain control, it is the perfect time to eliminate his most dangerous competition, and Draco gives him a method for doing this. It seems unreasonable for Voldemort to truly expect Draco to be able to kill Dumbledore when far better wizards than he have failed. So, maybe now is the time to force Snape to act. Snape says as much, saying that he suspects Voldemort expects Snape to do 'it' in the end. With Dumbledore out of the way, Snape is more valuable as a DE than as a Spy. In other words, Voldemort is confident enough of his position that he can afford to lose Snape-the Spy, and gain Snape-the General. Since I say that Voldemort is always planning to kill Dumbledore and this is nothing new, the difference is that now someone, Draco, has given him a method, and a true plan proceeds from there. So, I have yet to be convinced that the Vanishing Cabinets are not the seed from which the entire plan is spawned. That is the first chronological event, and the first logical event, and everything proceeds from there. Just this man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 19:02:48 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 19:02:48 -0000 Subject: Draco and Snape Re: CHAPDISC HBP 15, The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152270 Potioncat wrote: > Upthread someone mentioned Snape's line, "What thoughts are you trying to conceal from your master, Draco?" This comes just after Draco accuses Snape of Legilimency. I've always taken the question to mean, "What are you hiding from me?" Master in this case being teacher. Draco thinks, or twists it to mean, that Snape means LV. But what if Snape is suggesting that Draco is learning Occlumency to hide his thoughts from LV? Does anyone think Bellatrix is using Occlumency around the Dark Lord? Carol responds: I didn't see it that way at all. I don't think that Snape would refer to himself as anyone's master. If he had meant himself, he would have said "me." I regarded "your master" (Draco's master, Lord Voldemort) as a slip on Snape's part that Draco didn't catch. If Snape were really LV's man, surely he would have said "our master." But it was odd that he would ask the question in that way. Maybe he's trying to see whether Draco really does regard the Dark Lord as his master, though it seems obvious that he does. In any case, Draco's attempt at Occlumency is clumsy and easily detectable, unlike the more sophisticated Occlumency that Snape has apparently been using all these years, which enables him to lie to the Dark Lord undetected (though not unsuspected, IMO). If Draco made any such clumsy attempt at Occlumency to block Voldemort, he'd be Crucio'd on the spot. I think that Draco is telling the truth--he's learned rudimentary Occlumency from Aunt Bellatrix specifically to block Snape, whom Bellatrix still doesn't trust. (Maybe she's given his reasons for taking the UV some thought and arrived at the conclusion that he would only have risked his life for Draco if he's Dumbledore's man.) I don't think Bella would use Occlumency (which I doubt she's very good at anyway, considering how open she is with her emotions) against her dear master. She would view it as an act of disloyalty even if she thought she could get away with it, which of course she doesn't, given LV's skill at Legilimency. And I think her suspicion, which she doesn't dare voice, that Snape has indeed "somehow hoodwinked . . . the most accomplished Legilimens the world has ever seen," as Snape puts it in "Spinner's End" (HBP Am. ed. 26), is one of many reasons that she doesn't trust Snape and wants Draco to conceal what he's up to from him. I doubt that she has allowed Draco to suspect that she still sees Snape as Dumbledore's man; he certainly seems to think that Snape is a loyal DE, if a bit too eager for his own glory. Maybe she's the one who planted the "stealing my glory" idea in Draco's mind. Potioncat: > But what really jumped out at me was the image of Harry listening at > keyholes...just like Snape had done. Carol: Yes. That jumped out at me, too. One more parallel between them, and one more irony. Potioncat: > Very nice discussion, Carol. I'm glad I made through before the next > one came out. > Thanks, Potioncat. I know that SSS is working on the next one, but I'm not sure when it will be posted. Carol, again thanking Penapart Elf for reviving the discussions and wondering if she needs volunteers for the unassigned chapters From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 19:27:27 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 19:27:27 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Plan for Draco ... (wasRe: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152272 bboyminn wrote: > > I think way too much is being made of the 'Revenge against the Malfoys' angle. First and foremost, if Voldemort truly wants vengence or revenge, why doesn't he just take it? Why this wacky scheme involving Draco? > > If we look at this chronologically, the first event that occurs is Draco realizing that the Vanishing Cabinet represents a way into the school. THAT is why I use that as my starting point, because it is the first usable piece of information available. The next logical step is for smarmy Draco to present this information to Voldemort. The next logical step is that Voldemort hands Draco far more than Draco bargained for. I suspect Draco has delusions that he can be a DE and still keep his hands clean. Surprise, surprise. > > Voldemort could have accepted just the access to the Castle part of the plan, and still accomplished his goal, but his vengence is to give Draco the addition impossible task of killing Dumbledore. I seriously doubt that he expexted Draco to be capable of doing this, but it had the added benefit of tormenting all of he Malfoys. > But never before has Voldemort been able to get his DE's so close to Dumbledore and pull off a suprirse attack. That is the value of the Vanishing Cabinets, and that is the core of the plan. Tormenting the Malfoys is merely an added benefit. Carol responds: Exactly. To have Voldemort assign Draco the impossible task of killing Dumbledore *before* he knows about the passage into Hogwarts that can be created if Draco repairs the cabinet is (IMO) an absurd coincidence. As you say, there are other, much more efficient, ways of punishing Lucius Malfoy, starting with AKing his wife and child. There must be more to it, and that more, IMO, is the useful information that Draco has presented and the multiple evil uses to which it can be put. To have Draco present his discovery to LV *first*, having been motivated to join the DEs by vengeance against Harry and Dumbledore for his father's arrest, followed by Voldemort's *taking advantage* of that discovery to get DEs into the castle to kill Dumbledore if and when Draco fails in the attempt, is simple cause and effect, a logical sequence of events and an illustration of the way Voldemort's mind usually works. (Look at the way he handled the information he forcibly extracted from Bertha Jorkins.) The likelihood of Draco's failure, which can be used to punish the Malfoys, is simply icing on the cake. Carol, glad she's not the only one who holds this view From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon May 15 19:39:13 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 19:39:13 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Plan for Draco ... (wasRe: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152273 > Steve: > > ... why concoct such an unlikely ... plan as merely telling > > Draco to kill Dumbledore. It makes much more sense to have a > > real plan with some potential for success ... If Voldemort > > truly wanted vengence against the Malfoys, he wouldn't waste > > his time with wacky schemes, he would just take his vengence > > and be done with it. > > Magpie: > Once again, I direct you ..., specifically book IV, the book with > the unlikely and wacky plan that includes Harry having to win a > contest ... in order to get to the place Voldemort actually wants > him. And also Book VI, which includes an entire plot about > Voldemort merely telling Draco to kill Dumbledore .... It's the > book with the theme about murder splitting the soul and all that. bboyminn: Obviously, you see my 'plan' as being as irrational as I see your 'plan', so be it. But you have failed to effectively answer a question I posed twice, why the wacky scheme just to punish someone. Voldemort punishes his followers all the time for offenses great and small, so what's so special about this group of people. If he wants to punish Lucius, he as Draco and Narcissa at his disposal, no need for a plan, and that is exactly why I can't accept this as the foundation of 'The Plan'. Because it is completely unnecesary to have any plan at all, just punish them and be done with it. Specific to the plot of GoF, if you view it in context, it, while somewhat wacky, does make sense. Yes, Voldemort wants to get Harry, but as much as he wants to do that, he also wants to get away with it. People always say, why didn't Moody make Harry's toothbrush a Portkey. Well, the simply phrase, 'Ron, hand me my toothbrush' explains that away. It's unrealiable. Moody could invite Harry to his office and Portkey him away, but then Moody is under suspicion. Voldemort at that time only has two allies he can count on Crouch!Moody and Peter. I don't think with such a small force and a weak helpless body, he is willing to take that much risk. So, again, his objective is to get away with it. Also, it tends to ignore the fact that only Dumbledore can Porteky into and out of Hogwarts; he contorls the protections. Most have reasonable speculated that the Cup was already a Dumbledore Portkey intended to take the Winner out of the maze, which is exactly where it went the second time it was used. Also, Voldemort sees great PR (public relations) potential in 'The Boy Who Lived' simply disappearing under Dumbledore's nose at a spectacular public event. So, while Voldemort wants to create suspicion and chaos, he also wants his hand unseen in it. In that context, his plan does make sense. An elaborate scheme to punish the Malfoy, something he can do in a simple straight forward way, doesn't make sense. However, if he has a plan that allows him to attack Dumbledore, the additional benefit of tormenting the Malfoys does make sense. Further, what you are calling canon, are really the conclusions of distraught characters who do not themselves have all the information. Regarding the 'plot' of HBP, we don't know what 'The Plan' is until near the end of the book. What we see Draco doing on an on-going basis throughout the books is not 'killing Dumbledore', but trying to fix the Cabinet. In fact, he starts this effort before school even starts. Only when he thinks he might fail at fixing the Cabinet, does Draco try a couple of indirect methods of killing Dumbledore, and those are poorly planned and poorly executed. The on-going plot is not to kill Dumbledore but to fix the cabinet and bring DE's into the Castle, it is the success of those actions, that allow for the potential of killing Dumbledore. THAT is canon; Draco spends his time trying to fix the Cabinet, not trying to kill Dumbledore. > Magpie: > > I've got no problem with criticizing the plot of the book and > saying Voldemort is an inefficient villain, but you can't write > in scenes or ideas that aren't there to make it more personally > satisfying. Well, you can, but canon has more weight. > > -m > bboyminn: But I can speculate on a logical and likely sequence of events based on what I read in the books. What I read is that Draco spent the entire book trying to fix the cabinet, not trying to kill Dumbledore. Everything truly hinges on fixing the Cabinet, and the Cabinet is the bases for my sequence of events. Accept it, or reject it as you please. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 15 20:10:44 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 20:10:44 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152276 -- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixmum" wrote: > > Geoff Bannister wrote: > > Reading between the lines, I get a feeling that Viktor > > Krum was not a Karkaroff fan. A follow-up question > > would be, that although IK is or was a Death Eater, > > is there a pureblood restriction on entry to the school? > > > Phoenix answers: > > In GOF (US ed.), p. 165 Malfory states "...Father actually considered > sending me to Durmstrang...He knows the Headmaster, you see. Well you > know his opinion of Dumbledore- the man's such a Mudblood lover- and > Durmstang doesn't admit that sort of riff-raff." > > Of course, just because it's school policy, it doesn't mean all the > students believe in it. Look at the Hogwarts students who think only > purebloods should be permitted. I thought one of the points of Krum > taking Hermione to the ball, and their continued correspondence, was > to set up Krum's return as an ally in Harry's quest against Voldemort > in the last book. The fact that Krum would take a mudblood to the > ball, and apparently genuinely cares for her despite knowing she is > muggle-born, sets him up as a good guy by the end of GOF. > > Krum is from Bulgaria, LV hid in Romania for a while; perhaps there's > a horcrux, or a clue to one in that part of the world, and Harry will > need to travel there. Hermione's friendship with Krum would give them > a contact in that part of the world. Geoff: Thanks for the quote. I knew that Draco had made a comment about Durmstrang.but unusually for me, I couldn't find that reference yesterday. A moot point is that Draco only says that Karkaroff wouldn't admit a mudblood; that wouldn't discount a half-blood. I wonder what the proportion of purebloods to half-bloods in the Wizarding World is? After all, we have a comment from canon: '"It's a disgusting thing to call someone," said Ron, wiping his sweaty brow with a shaking hand. "Dirty blood, see. Common blood. It's mad. Most wizards these days are half-blood anyway. If we hadn't married Muggles we'd've died out."' (COS "Mudbloods and Murmurs" p.89 UK eidtion) Could Durmstrang be viable on a totally pureblood intake? From whtwitch91 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 19:58:08 2006 From: whtwitch91 at yahoo.com (whtwitch91) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 19:58:08 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (Vanishing Cabinets) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152277 A discussion has been going on for some time about Draco's repair of the Vanishing cabinets and if he had told Voldemort about his plan to break the DEs into Hogwarts in detail. I know we're supposed to snip, but I just couldn't figure out how to do it and not single someone out. I apologize for not snipping. In my opinion Voldemort was never told about the vanishing cabinet plan because he would have stopped it at once. First I asked myself, how did this pair of devices get set up? The vanishing cabinets are not like a pair of shoes, they don't even look alike, one is black, the other black and gold and in conventional muggle magic they work alone, usually. Someone, I think, set them up to work together as a passageway between Borgin and Burkes and Hogwarts. Who would do such a thing, and why? Unless there is an ESE! person at Hogwarts that would want to go to Knockturn Alley, a disreputable place, there is no reason for a member of the staff to do it. They would have set them up to go into Diagon Alley instead. But there is a reason why someone would want to go from Borgin and Burkes to Hogwarts and that is Voldemort himself. He used to work there. The propriators are off color. Ten years after Voldemort killed Hepzibiah Smith and stole her artifacts he came back to Hogwarts to ask for a teaching position that he didn't really want. On that visit he could have taken a nostalic tour and casully touched the cabinet. A quick spell and it is linked to the Knockturn Alley cabinet. DD thought that Voldemort wanted to look for more Horcruxes in Hogwarts, but perhaps he was looking for a safe place to hide one (or more) as well. Perhaps the damage done by Peeves wasn't the only reason the cabinet was malfunctioning. Perhaps Voldemort turned off the cabinets when he didn't want to use them. Then, in Harry's second year, they were truly broken and Voldemort couldn't get in. Before that he was in no physical condition to do it. I don't believe that Draco would have to go to Voldemort to get the DEs to enter Hogwarts. Bella and Narcissa could have set that up. His famiy is connected. And I think they wanted to present Voldemort with a "fait accompli" so he wouldn't have been told beforehand. Because if he set up the cabinets as a passageway there is no way he would want anyone to know about it. Poor Draco. Now I know this is all conjecture, but it does sort of hang together unlike most of my little theories of the month. Back to lurking. Sue From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Mon May 15 20:47:51 2006 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 20:47:51 -0000 Subject: Possible Flint in HBP re the Invisibility Cloak? In-Reply-To: <20060515020600.3904.qmail@web38212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152278 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, crystal borden wrote: > > > > gelite67 wrote: > >> At the beginning of HBP, DD tells Harry to keep his Invisibility > Cloak with him at all times and Harry agrees to do it. Yet, after > DD explains they are going Horcrux-Hunting, he instructs Harry to > go get the cloak. (Chapter 25) > > The text does not say that Harry gets his cloak, but does tell us > that Harry retrieve the Marauder's Map and Felix from his trunk, > which he gives to Hermione and Ron. And, Harry tells them that > DD "thinks" he is getting his cloak. Which, to me, implies that > Harry, in fact, had the cloak all along. > > I'm confused. I can understand why Harry wanted DD to think he > needed to retrieve his cloak, but I don't understand why, given that > DD had instructed Harry to always carry the cloak and Harry agreed, > why DD didn't ask Harry if he had the cloak or didn't assume that > Harry had the cloak. << > > > from julcrybor: > I think DD knew that Harry was going to have Ron and Hermione keep > watch when they left and knew what Harry had his suspicions of in > regards to Draco, so he gave Harry the chance of an excuse to go > tell Ron and Hermione because maybe he knew Harry wanted the peace > of mind of them keeping watch and protecting the other students. DD > knows more about what's going on than he lets on. > AmanitaMuscaria now - I think DD was giving Harry some time out, to get himself back in control. After all, Harry had gone from raging about Snape being the eavesdropper to promising DD to obey every order in very little time. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 20:39:32 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 20:39:32 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152279 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > > But Rowling doesn't "approve" of Snape's behavior. When asked why > Dumbledore allows Snape to teach, she basically said that "there are > all sorts of lessons in life; horrible teachers like Snape are one of > them!" Ahh, but the real problem with that is that DD is supposedly a "very wise man" and "the epitome of goodness." Sorry, but in my book a wise man and epitome of goodness does not stand back while children are abused. And yes, I think showing him doing so does amount to approving of the abuse of said children. Which is, IMO, reprehensible. And which, barring further explanation and a profound and genuine apology from Snape for his abuse, makes the books much fodder. Lupinlore From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Mon May 15 21:58:49 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 17:58:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060515215849.91083.qmail@web37203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152280 hickengruendler wrote: But what I cannot understand is, why she wrote in it again, instead of simply destroying the diary for good this time. IMO, even her youth doesn't explain this. Catherine now: This was how I read the situation. If you "lost" your diary (I guess she thought throwing it in the toilet would be permanent) and it was found, horror of horrors, by the boy you had written in it for about 1000 pages. Would you not be concerned that he read it? I'm sure her very first entry to the diary after she stole it was" Tom, you didn't tell him anything did you? Please tell me! OMG! I'm so embarassed, did you tell him anything....." Since Tom said that the more she spilled her secrets and fears into him, the stronger he became. So he must have been dissappointed, but I also think that he *really* hooked her back in after she stole it back. She might have been able to get away from him once, but *not* twice. The second her ink touched that paper, she was his and there was no turning back anymore. I don't think her intention was to steal the book to use it, but to steal it to find out what and if he said anything to Harry. Catherine __________________________________________________ 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 saberbunny at yahoo.ca Mon May 15 22:39:27 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:39:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Beauty /Ghost War/ Chapter 15 discussion - Dark Magic /Fleur/Umb In-Reply-To: <410.1a78b53.3198188b@aol.com> Message-ID: <20060515223927.8203.qmail@web37201.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152281 Catherine wrote in << Once Molly sees that Fleur is *really* in it for the long haul, that she truly loves Bill for who he is, and not just his looks, she changes immediately.>> Catlady replied: that it could just as well depict Fleur wanting to marry Bill for his money (not inherited money, money that he earned as a curse-breaker or as a Gringotts executive). Julie: How does she know Bill will ever be able to work again? And how much does a curse-breaker or a Gringotts executive earn? Catherine again: And if Bill were really rich, so rich that a shallow veela who could have pretty much any red-blooded male around...then why wouldn't he have given some cash to his family? As the oldest child, who came from a family rich in love, low in cash, would you not feel some obligation/wanting to help out? Would you not help with school books and the like? When the twins start making money, they buy nice things for their parents to thank them. And as much as I like the twins, I don't find them the most generous of spirit all the time. I can't see Molly and Arthur accepting cash, but Bill could buy Ron robes, or a wand, new books for Ginny... I really can't see Bill living in the laps of luxery while his family struggles to make ends meet. I could see Percy doing that though.... Catherine --------------------------------- Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Mon May 15 22:42:11 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 22:42:11 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152282 > Geoff: > Could Durmstrang be viable on a totally pureblood intake? > zgirnius: I tend to think Durmstrang probably takes half-bloods. However, what we do not know is the geographical range covered by the school. Based on the comments we hear about the surroundings there, I do not believe it is in Bulgaria, but someplace considerably further north. So it accepts students from more than one Muggle country, it would seem. And if Russia is one of these Muggle countries, Durmstrang is starting from a Muggle population base several times that of Britain + Ireland. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 22:44:53 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 22:44:53 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot (was: Re: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152283 > >>Carol: > > I've already given my reasons for thinking that Draco must have > approached Voldemort with his Vanishing Cabinet idea, which I > understand that you disagree with, but I'm rather surprised that > you'd call them "unreasonable." I supported them with canon in > various points in the thread, and I've seen no canon yet to the > contrary. > Betsy Hp: I *do* feel that this particular theory flies in the face of canon. And you're right, I should put my money where my mouth is. So here's the canon. [Books referenced are both scholastic editions.] First, when does Draco find out about the cabinets? Montague comes popping out of the cabinets towards during Harry's last Occlumency lesson, sometime in the spring [OotP p. 638]. He's described as remaining "confused and disorientated" at some point in May [678], and is still in the hospital wing at the time Harry and friends go off to the MoM, apparently unable to feed himself [730]. When Draco talks about his conversation with Montague about the cabinets it sounds as if Montague is taking the lead in their talk. "Everyone thought it was a really good story..." [HBP p.587]. Montague's telling a story to more than one person. This is not the action of someone who is confused and disorientated and needs to be spoon-fed his potions. At the earliest, the conversation occurs at the very end of the school year in OotP. Or the conversation takes place over the summer at the beginning of HBP, which strikes me as more likely. Either way, when Draco confronts Harry at the end of OotP, he doesn't act like he has a plan in the works. His threat is an open- ended one, and he even envokes his father: "Dad and the others will be out in no time..." [OotP p.851]. Combined with the spontaneous attack on the train, these facts tend to lean *away* from Draco cooking up a plan involving the cabinets before getting on the train home. It's the difference between the loose cannon Draco of OotP, and the focused Draco of HBP. Second, and this is huge IMO, when does Draco show an interest in the cabinets? Per canon, it's at the end of the summer, about a week after Harry's birthday [HBP p.106-107], which means only three weeks before school starts. Which means Draco fittered away his entire summer before making sure the second cabinet didn't get sold away, and checking to see if the first cabinet was even fixable. Draco does ask Burgin, "...you know how to fix it?" [125]. Why would he wait months to ask that highly important question? That goes completely against the newly focused Draco of HBP, who skips quidditch to work on the cabinets. And it's very strange behavior for Voldemort as well. That's the biggest hurdle those who support the "Draco approached Voldemort with the cabinet plan" have to jump for me. To my mind it's unreasonable to think that Draco would wait so long to approach Burgin, after being forward enough to approach Voldemort a couple of months before hand. The simpler (and more logical, IMO) explanation is that Draco talks to Montague over the summer *after* receiving his "kill Dumbledore" mission, and *then* comes up with the cabinet plan. Because canon is *very* clear that Draco is given his task at the beginning of the summer. I think it's understood that the first three chapters of HBP occur on the same night. And Harry specifically refers to being at the Dursleys for only a "fortnight" [44]. > >>Carol: > > How about some canon to convince me that Voldemort came after > Draco? > Betsy Hp: Okay! "Draco should be proud," said Bellatrix indifferently. "The Dark Lord is granting him a great honor. And I will say this for Draco: He isn't shrinking away from his duty, he seems glad of the chance to prove himself, excited at the prospect --" Narcissa began to cry in earnest [...] "Why Severus? Why my son?" [HBP p.33] All of the words used here points to Draco receiving an assignment. Bellatrix is pleased that Draco isn't put off by his assignment, that he's eager for it, etc. She doesn't say anything about "initiative" or "volunteering", it's "not shrinking" and "duty" that's used. In fact, there's nothing to suggest that Draco put *himself* forward, otherwise the question "why" would be answered simply, "because he asked for it." > >>Betsy Hp: > > For another, Snape says he tried to talk Voldemort out of giving > > Draco the assignment, but that Voldemort was too eager to see > > Lucius punished. > > > >>Carol: > Sorry, Betsy, but this is a flat-out error. Snape actually refuses > to do any such thing: "If you are imagining I can persuade the > Dark Lord to change his mind, I am afraid there is no hope, no > hope at all" (HBP Am. ed. 33). > Betsy Hp: Oops! But actually, if we continue with that discussion, my point is still proven, I think. "The Dark Lord will not be persuaded, and I am not stupid enough to attempt it," said Snape flatly. "I cannot pretend that the Dark Lord is not angry with Lucius. Lucius was supposed to be in charge. He got himself captured, along with how many others, and failed to retrieve the prophecy into the bargin. Yes, the Dark Lord is angry Narcissa, very angry indeed." [HBP p.34] Here is the explanation for Voldemort assigning Draco the task of killing Dumbledore. He's very, very angry. > >>bboyminn: > > If Voldemort wants to punish the Malfoys, he will just punish them > rather that resorting to a long drawn out wacky scheme. > Betsy Hp: Snape, Narcissa and Bellatrix, people who've worked closely with Voldemort for years, all believe this task has been assigned as a punishment for Lucius. Dumbledore, who's studied Voldemort for years, believes Voldemort has given this assignment as punishment for Lucius. Remember, this is a man who Imperio's children into killing their parents. Or who sets werewolves to attack the children of those who've displeased him. Voldemort is all about twisted, cruel, and creative means of punishing those he's displeased with. And he's particularly fond of twisting the family bond. No, I think this "long drawn out wacky scheme" is exactly Voldemort's style. Betsy Hp From gelite67 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 23:11:35 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 23:11:35 -0000 Subject: Possible Flint in HBP re the Invisibility Cloak? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amanitamuscaria1" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, crystal borden > wrote: > > > > > > > > gelite67 wrote: > > >> At the beginning of HBP, DD tells Harry to keep his Invisibility > > Cloak with him at all times and Harry agrees to do it. Yet, after > > DD explains they are going Horcrux-Hunting, he instructs Harry to > > go get the cloak. (Chapter 25) > > > > The text does not say that Harry gets his cloak, but does tell us > > that Harry retrieve the Marauder's Map and Felix from his trunk, > > which he gives to Hermione and Ron. And, Harry tells them that > > DD "thinks" he is getting his cloak. Which, to me, implies that > > Harry, in fact, had the cloak all along. > > > > I'm confused. I can understand why Harry wanted DD to think he > > needed to retrieve his cloak, but I don't understand why, given > that > > DD had instructed Harry to always carry the cloak and Harry agreed, > > why DD didn't ask Harry if he had the cloak or didn't assume that > > Harry had the cloak. << > > > > > > from julcrybor: > > I think DD knew that Harry was going to have Ron and Hermione keep > > watch when they left and knew what Harry had his suspicions of in > > regards to Draco, so he gave Harry the chance of an excuse to go > > tell Ron and Hermione because maybe he knew Harry wanted the peace > > of mind of them keeping watch and protecting the other students. DD > > knows more about what's going on than he lets on. > > > > AmanitaMuscaria now - I think DD was giving Harry some time out, to > get himself back in control. After all, Harry had gone from raging > about Snape being the eavesdropper to promising DD to obey every > order in very little time. > Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria Angie again: Good theories, both. I love the "time out" theory, especially, and the fact that DD did it without being obvious. After Harry exhausted himself with all the running, he had no more energy for being angry! > From kaleeyj at gmail.com Mon May 15 23:23:09 2006 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 23:23:09 -0000 Subject: Ginny and her brothers (was: Ginny's Behavior) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152285 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Alan Wilson" wrote: > > Ceridwen: > Ron, as her brother, will be more critical of her than anyone else. > His underlying concern will also be more personal than another > person's - the WW seems like a conservative society where things like > this is concerned; he is trying to protect her reputation. True, he > did it poorly. But, as you imply yourself, siblings have a special > relationship. They will yell when they really only care. > > [snip] > > On who Bill decides to marry, Ginny has no business butting in. > > > > BAW: > Hold up a moment! It is OK for a brother to object to whom > his sister dates, but a sister must accept whom a brother > hooks up with? Surely you can't mean anything so sexist. > But, if not, what DO you mean? > Yb's turn now: I've noticed a lot of people getting hung up on this - but there is a difference in the situations. In fact a bit of a handful. 1) Ron is Ginny's older brother. He is expected to look out for her, most of his family probably expects him to. Fred and George do the same - I would imagine Percy would if he was nearby. (BTW, whoever said Ron was Victorian and something to the effect of 'old fashioned', he is. This is the WW. The society hasn't aged as much as the Muggle world since the Great Seclusion. We see a lot of old-fashionedness in the WW.) Ron /would/ be held accountable if 'rumors' started flying about a certain redheaded Gryffindor. (I'm not saying they would; she's not playing anyone, not really playing the field, and she and Dean were in a shortcut behind a tapestry - not exactly in the Dining Hall like her older brother and Lav-Lav. I'm just saying that to an old-fashioned older brother and oold-fashioned parents concerned about their only sister/daughter, this would not look good.) Ginny, on the other hand, is Bill's baby sister - she isn't expected to 'look after him'. 2) Ron does sort of step in and call Ginny on her boyfriends. From what I've seen, Ginny doesn't call Bill out (she may have before HBP started, but we never see Bill respond to it.) Her feelings are a passive dislike toward Phlegm and making fun of her behind her back. Not very nice, not very mature, but more on that in the next point. 3) Bill is Ginny's oldest brother, was probably a babysitter on occasion when he wasn't at school, maybe even let her play with his wand or some such when Molly wasn't looking. She has an almost hero-worship going on for him, and it probably stems from him being nine(?) years older. She definitely doesn't see Fleur as /worthy/ of him. Someone mentioned up thread that Ginny probably wouldn't approve of /any/ girl he brought home. I agree. She's much like Molly on this issue. They both know that they can't convince Bill otherwise, but they aren't happy with his choice. Ron showed this a bit in OotP - he comments on one Michael Corner as if the guy isn't worthy of her. He wants her to date someone more suitable (and his body language (though it may be Harry's wishful thinking) alludes to Harry as being that more worthy person). Some other things to point out: Fleur does seem rather annoying - I was going to say condescending, but I think that's more the juxtaposition with Molly's reaction to her than anything - to the Weasleys. She twitters on about wedding plans, not paying attention to the rather open hostility towards her coming from the matriarch - the lady with the pants in the family. Not asking for much love, it seems. And she's part Veela - that right there is a huge turn off to other women - if a supermodel started dating my brother, I'd likely be a bit hostile too. Also, Ron /doesn't/ sit down and talk with Dean, like most older brothers I know would do. (Granted, a year and a half apart - it changes the dynamics of the relationship - that position would be more relegated to the twins or Percy.) He doesn't bother her after the incident with Dean. He didn't corner Michael Corner (sorry, couldn't resist :) ). They both got hotheaded in the hall after Ron caught her kissing Dean, but I think that's just their mother's personality coming out in them - most of the Weasley children (if not all) have a severe shortage of fuse. And again, the twins didn't have a 'talk' with Michael Corner either (not that we saw, anyway). These older brothers are taking a much less active role than I would expect them to - granted, I imagine Ginny can take care of herself. I don't think that Ginny has any right to control who Bill dates/marries/ etc. And she doesn't. Ron shouldn't have any control over who Ginny dates, either. And he doesn't. She doesn't let him tell her who to date. I feel that due to Ron's age in relation to Ginny's, the fact that he's the only sibling she has left in school, and (sexist remark coming, I admit it) due to his gender, he will by nature have more (maybe more vaild) objections to who she dates, than Ginny will regarding Bill's choice in women. Not that said objections will make a lick of difference in either case. The two situations are quite different, mostly due to the ages of those involved. Yb, who's an old-fashioned girl who comes from an old fashioned family From kaleeyj at gmail.com Mon May 15 23:38:33 2006 From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 23:38:33 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: <20060515215849.91083.qmail@web37203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152286 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, catherine higgins wrote: > > > > hickengruendler wrote: But what I cannot understand is, why she wrote > in it again, instead of simply destroying the diary for good this > time. IMO, even her youth doesn't explain this. > > Catherine now: > > This was how I read the situation. If you "lost" your diary (I guess she thought throwing it in the toilet would be permanent) and it was found, horror of horrors, by the boy you had written in it for about 1000 pages. Would you not be concerned that he read it? I'm sure her very first entry to the diary after she stole it was" Tom, you didn't tell him anything did you? Please tell me! OMG! I'm so embarassed, did you tell him anything....." Since Tom said that the more she spilled her secrets and fears into him, the stronger he became. So he must have been dissappointed, but I also think that he *really* hooked her back in after she stole it back. She might have been able to get away from him once, but *not* twice. The second her ink touched that paper, she was his and there was no turning back anymore. > > I don't think her intention was to steal the book to use it, but to steal it to find out what and if he said anything to Harry. > > Catherine > Excellent post, Catherine. This is how I always read that particular time period in COS. Ginny manages to get rid of the Diary, presumably by flushing it down the loo. Harry finds it. When Ginny finds out that he has the Diary, she's horrified. Diary!Tom can talk back to her - what if he tells /Harry/ what she's said about him? She's still shy as a bug around him, and the thought of him finding out any of her secrets is worse than any punishment she could receive for breaking into his dorm room and stealing the Diary back. She contemplates throwing it away for a few seconds, but she /has/ to know that Harry didn't read her Diary. She can't very well ask him, she'd sooner sink through the floor, and she can't ask any of his friends. The only two who would know would probably tell him anyway, and one of them /is/ her older brother. But the Diary answers back... She writes in it just once to make sure that Tom didn't tell Harry anything, but he teases her a bit, drawing her in further. By the time she feels secure in the knowledge that Tom didn't sing (and remember, she still has to work out a better way to get rid of the Diary), he's got her hooked again. ~Yb, who's shift key hangs on too long and Harry always always always comes out as HArry. From juli17 at aol.com Tue May 16 00:47:10 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 20:47:10 EDT Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption Message-ID: <20.5491ef17.319a7b0e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152287 Leslie 41 wrote: > > But Rowling doesn't "approve" of Snape's behavior. When asked why > Dumbledore allows Snape to teach, she basically said that "there are > all sorts of lessons in life; horrible teachers like Snape are one of > them!" Lupinlore: Ahh, but the real problem with that is that DD is supposedly a "very wise man" and "the epitome of goodness." Sorry, but in my book a wise man and epitome of goodness does not stand back while children are abused. And yes, I think showing him doing so does amount to approving of the abuse of said children. Which is, IMO, reprehensible. And which, barring further explanation and a profound and genuine apology from Snape for his abuse, makes the books much fodder. Julie: The bottom line really comes down to what each individual person considers "child abuse" at the level where it must be publicly condemned and punished. Clearly some things, such as sexual abuse, physical beatings, burning with cigarettes (or magical quills), starvation, etc, would be almost universally considered child abuse of that sort. Unfortunately it becomes less clear when you speak of milder forms of "abuse" such as yelling at a child, spanking a child, humiliating a child in front of a class, etc. One reason it is less clear is because EVERY HUMAN BEING born in this world has been abusive to others in their lives, including children (unless they are never around children). We've all lost our tempers and said hurtful things to others simply to be hurtful, and many parents have called their children brats, spanked them for misbehaving, etc. Many regretted losing that control, though others consider such actions acceptable discipline (spanking, for example). The fact is, even the best parents and teachers sometimes give in to their baser instincts. McGonagall did so with Neville, out of sheer frustration. We regret it later, but we are all only human, and thus we frequently act human. The question is where does a person get to the point where he/she goes beyond mean, unkind, etc, into actual child abuse. This is a long-winded way of getting to my point, which is that I don't consider Snape abusive in the criminal sense, where public condemnation and punishment are required. Now, whether he deserves a talking to from Dumbledore at times is another subject, and I think he does (and he may get it, we just don't know). Albus Dumbledore is not unaware of Snape's mean nature, nor are most of the other teachers, who often take mild steps to counteract it. But it's clear from the books that none consider it on the level of abuse in the above criminal sense. That kind of abuse, what many of us here would consider definitive "child abuse" is what is practiced by Umbridge, who does deserve to be condemned and punished. And again, we don't all agree on that definition, and each person is within his or her right to draw their line where they see fit. But in the WW, and yes, also in the real world, Umbridge's actions are criminal and punishable, Snape's are not. Thus Dumbledore is under no moral obligation to condemn Snape, nor is JKR. (And lack of public condemnation does not equal approval, IMO, but an acceptance of Snape's nature and the value of children experiencing such a nature, one which they will encounter repeatedly in their lives--as JKR so stated.) Of course, I do think Snape will get his poetic justice, which is another thing entirely. And something with as variable a definition as child abuse, which means we can argue about what exactly defines poetic justice forever also! Julie (who thinks a good part of poetic justice for Snape is that he has to live with his actions, and the bitterness that eats him alive as much as he uses it to metaphorically devour others) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Mon May 15 22:49:15 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 15:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060515224915.90715.qmail@web61316.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152288 phoenixmum wrote: >> I thought one of the points of Krum taking Hermione to the ball, and their continued correspondence, was to set up Krum's return as an ally in Harry's quest against Voldemort in the last book. The fact that Krum would take a mudblood to the ball, and apparently genuinely cares for her despite knowing she is muggle-born, sets him up as a good guy by the end of GOF. << Joe: He might be a good guy but that whole 17/18 year old international quidditch star asking a 14/15 year old girl out strikes me as more than a little creepy. From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 16 01:22:14 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 21:22:14 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort's Plan for Draco ... (wasRe: Ginny Haters/ a bit of Draco) References: Message-ID: <007601c67887$2b145a30$e598400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152289 Okay, let's try this again. bboyminn: Obviously, you see my 'plan' as being as irrational as I see your 'plan', so be it. Magpie: No, I do not see your 'plan' as irrational. The point I keep trying to make is that whether or not you or I find something irrational is irrelevent. It's not about the two of us presenting our theories and voting on it, as if the books have nothing to say on the matter. I don't have to answer why the wacky scheme instead of just punishing the Malfoys for it to be the way it went down in canon, though I am happy to do it below. But first, let's get back to the GoF plot for a second. I've snipped your explanations for why that plan is very logical. I'm happy that you find it a logical plan and it's satisfying to you, but that is not what makes the plan canon. I find it a plot device created more to make sure it lasts all of Harry's fourth year and has a lot of exciting things for Harry to do during the book than a good plan, but the fact that I find it an incredibly silly, risky plan, does not make it not canon. All the holes anyone can poke in the plan does not make it not canon. It's canon because the book is over and all the reasons for Voldemort choosing that plan that I'm going to get are there and that's the answer I get. I could come up with a much better plan that incorporates all the stuff in canon, but without it being presented there in the book, it doesn't matter. It's the same with this Malfoy plot. As to the question of why a wacky scheme just to punish someone, that's completely in character for Voldemort as we've met him. He's never been a villain who's about strategy over everything. He works on personal resentment and symbolic gestures. Giving Draco this task is a brilliant lesson for Lucius that reflects exactly the ways that Lucius has betrayed and let Voldemort down. He's not just a random DE who needs a Crucio to put him in line. He needs a far more dramatic lesson, the type that to me it seems Voldemort loves to give. He often chooses the symbolic importance over the strategy. You have suggested some important things happening in the books. In order for me to think this stuff happened in the story I read in the books I don't need it told to me in a way I like or sounds logical, I need references to this stuff that the author put in, even if it's a reference that there's something important she's leaving out. I see plenty of places those references should be or imo would be if those scenes happened, but all you're giving me are reasons you reject the answers we're given. The final revelations of HBP are, according to this theory, neither revelations nor final. So even if I say I don't believe this explanation about Voldemort giving Draco the task to kill DD because he's punishing Lucius (which I really do because it's exactly the kind of operatic sins of the father type stuff that these books are full of) you still haven't given me positive evidence of this big turnaround Voldemort pulls on Draco, or everything being different on the DE side this year because of this thing Draco told Voldemort. The big question for me isn't why Voldemort would come up with a plan for Draco to kill Dumbledore, but why on earth, if Voldemort came up with the plan for Draco to kill Dumbledore only because Draco himself brought a Cabinet plot to Voldemort, JK Rowling did not share this important part of the story with the readers. > bboyminn: > But I can speculate on a logical and likely sequence of events based > on what I read in the books. What I read is that Draco spent the > entire book trying to fix the cabinet, not trying to kill Dumbledore. > Everything truly hinges on fixing the Cabinet, and the Cabinet is the > bases for my sequence of events. > > Accept it, or reject it as you please. Magpie: Sure you can speculate all you want, but we're still left with the same book, one which contains not a mention, not a reference, not a hint of the scenes described in this theory. It's not the book's job to prove that Draco didn't go to Voldemort first and have his first plan turned back on him, it's your job to show that the book says that did happen. If this story shows up in Book VII I'll be glad to accept it and give people credit for guessing this was what really happened--and probably I'll say I wish they could have pointed out lines in the book that were clues. If JKR reveals it in an interview I'll probably also accept it as having happened and still wonder why on earth she accidentally didn't write that. But as it is it's just like many other theories that rely on the premise that the revelations at the ends of books are never final, just things waiting to be overwritten in the future. It also takes a story that, imo, deals with the things that seem to interest Rowling (revenge, one generation's mistakes being visited on the next, personal resentment and grudges) and makes it into a story that turns on things that don't interest her as much (strategy, technical magical stuff). Carol: Exactly. To have Voldemort assign Draco the impossible task of killing Dumbledore *before* he knows about the passage into Hogwarts that can be created if Draco repairs the cabinet is (IMO) an absurd coincidence. Magpie: Of the best literary kind, yes. Voldemort gives Draco a task that's supposed to be impossible, but thanks to Rowling planting the Montague story earlier, Draco has a way to make it work. Since many characters seem to tell us that Voldemort expects the plan to end in Malfoy's death, the fact that it ends with Malfoy alive and Dumbledore dead is a surprise, not a coincidence. Carol: To have Draco present his discovery to LV *first*, having been motivated to join the DEs by vengeance against Harry and Dumbledore for his father's arrest, followed by Voldemort's *taking advantage* of that discovery to get DEs into the castle to kill Dumbledore if and when Draco fails in the attempt, is simple cause and effect, a logical sequence of events and an illustration of the way Voldemort's mind usually works. (Look at the way he handled the information he forcibly extracted from Bertha Jorkins.) Magpie: Yes, look at Bertha Jorkins. Specifically, look at the way we HEAR about this story of Bertha Jorkins' information in the book as part of the answer to the mystery. Now find some similar scene in HBP where we hear about Draco's information being the thing that set off the revenge plot and how he only meant to offer Voldemort a way to get DEs into the castle for whatever reason, but instead Voldemort told him to kill Dumbledore. It's not there. What's there instead is something different. The author is the one who should be telling me how much more logical it is to think Draco went to Voldemort first etc. is than it is to think Voldemort is punishing the Malfoys, and she should be telling it to me in the book. I can't be expected to finish the book and say, "Voldemort couldn't really be punishing Lucius Malfoy only to have Draco turn out to have something up his sleeve. I'm sure if I imagine scenes in my own mind I'll hit on what really happened." If that's what I was supposed to do then unfortunately, I didn't. I came away from the book thinking "Gee, Rowling did a great job of slowly letting Lucius do one and another thing to anger Voldemort. And look, Voldemort has found a way to punish him that perfectly fits in Voldemort's trademark dramatic and symbolic way: Lucius has destroyed Voldemort's precious horcrux (a piece of himself living outside himself and a symbol of his immortality) and failed his Dark Lord. Now Voldemort will watch as Lucius' precious son (a piece of himself living outside himself and a symbol of immortality) may also fail LV and be killed in the process. And how clever of her to as usual find a way for the younger generation to zig when the older generation expects them to zag and wind up surprising everyone, thus pulling all the adults into trouble with him." I feel like the very basic thing I'm saying never seems to come through, because, as I said at the very beginning of this post, how well anyone can make "Draco went to Voldemort with a plan to get DEs into Hogwarts and Voldemort turned around and told him to kill DD with that plan" work is irrelevent. There's plenty of theories that can be made to work and will appeal to people. For something to have actually happened in canon I need to see the author writing that story. It's true that there are sometimes things left open in the story where we can imagine what happened. We don't know just how the Rosemerta Imperius went down. All we needed to know was that it did. So we're free to imagine how that happened. However, this theory is more than that, filling spaces that aren't left open, and the plot that it's intentionally trying to push into the background is actually the one that's had a lot of work put into it--the Malfoys have been groomed for this for books. We've got the diary plot in CoS, the many echoes of that book in this one (in that book Draco says he wants to help the Heir and Lucius is intentionally keeping him out of the fight, in HBP he's forced to help the Heir and is no longer out of it), we've got Lucius introduced as the DE who "got away with it" and escaped punishment. GoF has Barty Crouch giving us a foreshadowing of Draco being punished for his father's "slipperiness," which LV himself also notes in that book. And in fifth year we've got Lucius put in jail and Draco itching to make things right. So yes, I see how this alternate theory is supposed to work. I see that it's more satisfying on a strategic level in the way it makes Voldemort act out of smarts and opportunity rather than having him make a big symbolic gesture. I see the appeal for many of an HBP where everything's that much more Draco's own fault. But I still see nothing in the actual books of that direction in the story, while I see a lot of careful buildup to the revenge story, many references to the revenge story, and far more familiar thematic territory with the revenge story. -m From zgirnius at yahoo.com Tue May 16 01:47:04 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 01:47:04 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: <20060515224915.90715.qmail@web61316.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152290 > Joe: > He might be a good guy but that whole 17/18 year old international > quidditch star asking a 14/15 year old girl out strikes me as more > than a little creepy. > zgirnius: Hermione has a September birthday, so make that 15. It does not strike me as particularly odd. I remember quite distinctly one of my classmates freshman year in high school getting asked to the Senior Prom by a star of the high school football (the US kind) team. (Unlike Hermione, she trumpeted her good fortune far and wide, or I would never have known, as only seniors and their dates attend the Prom.) Yes, we could imagine that Krum would prefer a supermodel or some such equivalent in the WW, but he's stuck at Hogwarts for the year, so schoolgirls are his only available option. He is still in school himself. From estesrandy at yahoo.com Tue May 16 02:46:20 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 02:46:20 -0000 Subject: Possible Flint in HBP re the Invisibility Cloak? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152291 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > > > > At the beginning of HBP, DD tells Harry to keep his Invisibility > > Cloak with him at all times and Harry agrees to do it. > > > > Yet, after DD explains they are going Horcrux-Hunting, he instructs > > Harry to go get the cloak. (Chapter 25) > > > > The text does not say that Harry gets his cloak, but does tell us > > that Harry retrieve the Marauder's Map and Felix from his trunk, > > which he gives to Hermione and Ron. ... > > > > I'm confused. ... I don't understand why, given that DD had > > instructed Harry to always carry the cloak and Harry agreed, > > why DD didn't ask Harry if he had the cloak or didn't assume > > that Harry had the cloak. ... > > > > Any thoughts? HMMMMMM...Unless of course, the Dumbledore at the end of the book is not the same Dumbledore that told Harry to always carry the cloak with him at the beginning of the book? What if the polyjuice potion or other spell that allows this character to switch places with Dumbledore cannot properly cover up the Dark Mark on this person's arm? So Dumbledore curses his arm to prevent any sign of this mark to appear when the two switch identities. And Dumbledore sneaks off as Snape at the end of book six... Randy I know that I did not start this idea but merely asked a few questions about it. By the way, the Snape/Dumbledore theory was first presented to me in August of 2005 by one of my friends who only reads the books once each. Then I saw other people with the same idea on the internet. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 16 04:40:04 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 04:40:04 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: <20.5491ef17.319a7b0e@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152292 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at ... wrote: > > Lupinlore: > Ahh, but the real problem with that is that DD is supposedly a "very wise man" and "the epitome of goodness." Sorry, but in my book a wise man and epitome of goodness does not stand back while children are abused. And yes, I think showing him doing so does amount to approving of the abuse of said children. Which is, IMO, > reprehensible. And which, barring further explanation and a profound and genuine apology from Snape for his abuse, makes the books much fodder. > > Julie: > The bottom line really comes down to what each individual person > considers "child abuse" at the level where it must be publicly condemned and punished. (Snip)> Unfortunately it becomes less clear when you speak of milder forms of "abuse" such as yelling at a child, spanking a child, humiliating a child in front of a class, etc. One reason it is less clear is because EVERY HUMAN BEING born in this world has been abusive to others in their lives, including children (Snip)I don't consider Snape abusive in the criminal sense, where public condemnation and punishment are required. (Snip)> But it's clear from the books that none consider it on the level of > abuse in the above criminal sense. > (snip) Umbridge's actions are criminal and punishable, Snape's > are not. Thus Dumbledore is under no moral obligation to condemn > Snape, nor is JKR. Tonks: I agree with Julie. In addition, and in defense of DD (as usual), I would like to say that we must remember what skills Snape possesses. He is apparently one of the best Potion Masters in the WW. And his knowledge of the Dark Arts is very important, as well as his knowledge of the counter-curses to the Dark Arts. Add to this the fact that he is a double agent and we have a Professor that MUST stay at Hogwarts. He is an invaluable resource, even if we take his secret agent activities out of the picture. Allowing Snape to teach children even though he is a bit sarcastic at times is simply a necessary evil. Snape is not sexually abusive of the kids. Except for the time that he threw Harry out of the pensive, Snape has never been physically abusive. We can not protect children from nasty, mean spirited people. They are everywhere. We all know them. If you try to rid the world of them you will burn yourself out and have no energy to go after the real criminals. Nasty people are just there. They are not pleasant. They will not get golden crowns in heaven, but they are not criminals either. We just have to learn to cope with them and not allow them to get to us. That is hard, but it may well be an important lesson for Harry in his fight against LV. Tonks_op From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue May 16 08:29:21 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 08:29:21 -0000 Subject: Ginny/possession In-Reply-To: <20060515215849.91083.qmail@web37203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152293 > Catherine now: > > This was how I read the situation. If you "lost" your diary (I guess she thought throwing it in the toilet would be permanent) and it was found, horror of horrors, by the boy you had written in it for about 1000 pages. Would you not be concerned that he read it? I'm sure her very first entry to the diary after she stole it was" Tom, you didn't tell him anything did you? Please tell me! OMG! I'm so embarassed, did you tell him anything....." Hickengruendler: Yes, I agree with you, that's how I read the scene as well. It's just that I think, that this reading supports pippin's argument, that Ginny is to blame for what happened. At the very least she's to blame for the attack on Hermione and Penelope, which happened after she got the diary back. As I already said, I can understand all of Ginny's actions, until she wrote in it again. She already suspected what the diary was doing. She even threw it away. But if your theory is right she wrote in it again, because of her own personal problems and in spite of her suspicions that it made her attack Muggleborns. She basically put her secret above the life and safety of the other Hogwarts students. And this interpretation worries me, because I don't think we are meant to see Ginny as that self-centered. And yes, I don't think even her youth fully explains her actions here. If she was old enough to realize, that something was wrong with the diary and to throw it away, then she should also be old enough, to not open it again, in spite of the fact, that she wanted to know if Harry knew about her secrets. Maybe I'm too harsh on her here, I don't know. I'm not a fan of her, to say it carefully, and I wish someone would have given her a bit of her own medicine in HBP. But my dislike only steams from the later books, I positively loved her in GoF, for example, and I never blamed her for what happened during CoS. But during this dicussion, I find the arguments of those, who argue that Ginny is partly to blame, because she stole the diary back and wrote in it again, just more convincing. And even in your post, which I suppose was meant as a defense for Ginny, you are giving her selfish motives for writing in the diary again, which she put above the safety of Hermione, for example. From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Tue May 16 11:11:31 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 11:11:31 -0000 Subject: Scar Speculation Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152294 JPK has stated in an interview that, as things stand, the last word of the final Book will be "scar". Given this information has anyone speculated, or does anyone now want to speculate, what the last SENTENCE will be? From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 16 11:51:04 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 11:51:04 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152295 > Carol responds: > Here, Potioncat. I'll join your tennis match--which may not be to your > advantage considering how vehemently some of my opinions have been > rejected lately. Potioncat: With Alla too, we have a foursome! There's room for more... snipping Carol's very eloquent post. > Carol: > As for Merope (who, I agree, must be giving Tom Sr. repeated doses of > the love potion to sustain his "love"), I feel nothing but pity for > her. She has been treated all her life with abuse and contempt, and > she thinks she loves the handsome young Muggle on the hill. For her, > it's like a fairy tale. All she has to do is give him a bit of love > potion and they'll live happily ever after. Potioncat: I pity Merope as well. JKR really turned the tables didn't she? We were expecting a woman who had been cruely used by her husband. Instead we have two victims. Three, actually. Or thousands if you count the WW. Carol and Alla gave oppsite opinions about Tom's responsibility to his son. I realised after I posted the question that it would go wildly OT if it took off at all. I have to say, I agree with Carol on what Tom ought to do, but I'm not sure society would impose it, under the circumstances. Who remembers the book, "Maggie" or "Maggie, a Girl of the Streets."? It's about a young woman who finds herself in a similar position to Merope, written in the 1880s, early 1900s by a famous dead guy.(American, I think.) At any rate, having made the great offense of becoming pregnant, she was left on her own, deserving of all her problems. I think she ended up just like Merope. Dead. Why do you suppose Tom Riddle, Sr. never re-married? (Other than JKR thought 3 people sitting in the dining room were quite enough for a teenager to take out?) Did he know Merope had died? Did he know where the baby was? Again, did he know there was a baby? Now, back to love potions themselves. Why did Slughorn have a steaming cauldron of Amortentia sitting on the very desk of teenagers? Let's see, he had Polyjuice near the Ravenclaws, Felix Felicis on his desk, Veritaserum near the Slytherins and Amortentia near the Hufflpuff/Gryffindor table. Seems like a dangerous combination of potions for Slughorn to have sitting out. Any of them could have been slipped into a vial by a cunning student. I wonder if JKR had any meaning to that arrangement in her mind? Amortentia is the most powerful love potion in the world. Already made and affecting the students as soon as they sit near it. Harry smells a combination of scents, one at least is firmly connected to the Burrow. He found it to be the most seductive scent ever, and even Ron was grinning lazily. Then Ron seems to be competing with Harry for Hermione's approval. Hermione starts to tell what it smell likes to her, after announcing its aroma depends on "what attracts us", then stops in mid-answer. Right after Potions they go to lunch, and Ginny joins them. Harry notices she smells like the scent in the Amortentia. Hmmm...seems the most powerful love potion in the world works by inhalation. It doesn't cause love of course, but creates an obsession. Does anyone else wonder about the coincidence of this as the story goes on? Potioncat, who originally thought things worked out the way they were supposed to, all on their own, but who isn't so sure now. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 12:40:16 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 12:40:16 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152297 > Potioncat: > I pity Merope as well. JKR really turned the tables didn't she? We > were expecting a woman who had been cruely used by her husband. > Instead we have two victims. Three, actually. Or thousands if you > count the WW. Alla: Could you give me an example of Merope being a victim in her relationship with Tom Riddle? I mean, I don't think anybody would argue that she was the victim of horrible abuse, but how is it in any way, shape or form diminishes the wrongness of what she did to that poor man? He did not ASK for his life to be destroyed, as you said he never remarried. I speculate that he was so traumatised that he was unable to rebuild his life ever again, basically the woman he loved was taken away from him, IMO. And I am also not talking about Tom Riddle general character, for all we know as somebody told me he could have been a real jerk in his relationship with the world in general. But it is irrelevant IMO. He did not do anything to Merope, he had a misfortune to be seen by her. Luckily, I never had ( and hopefully never will) the misfortune to deal with something as terrifying as rape, but I think I can still imagine the humiliation, the hurt Tom Riddle felt the moment he woke up from his nightmare. Do I blame him that he fled and never wanted to see Merope ever again? Not in the slightest. Carol said that it took an act of courage from Merope to stop feeding him love potion. Well, maybe, although the fact that she indeed stopped makes me also be MORE hard on her, not LESS. Because IMO it means that she cannot claim "insanity" or something like that as her defense. To me it means that she knew right from wrong and that makes in my book her crime even more horrifying. > Potioncat: > Why do you suppose Tom Riddle, Sr. never re-married? (Other than JKR > thought 3 people sitting in the dining room were quite enough for a > teenager to take out?) Did he know Merope had died? Did he know where > the baby was? Again, did he know there was a baby? Alla: As I said, I speculate he was too traumatised to ever think about building relationship with anybody ever again. I can easily imagine him replaying in his head what Merope did to him and thinking that his former love Cecilia can be just like Merope and can also "hoodwink" him. I can easily imagine him thinking that maybe he also does not love Cecilia, but only thinks he does. JMO, Alla From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue May 16 13:18:45 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 13:18:45 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152299 > Alla: > > Could you give me an example of Merope being a victim in her > relationship with Tom Riddle? I mean, I don't think anybody would > argue that she was the victim of horrible abuse, but how is it in > any way, shape or form diminishes the wrongness of what she did to > that poor man? > Pippin: ::making it a fivesome:: Even the randiest teenage boy is not compelled to make love to someone just because he finds the object of his obsession is attractive and available, not even if he thinks he is madly in love. Nor is he compelled to make the vows of marriage: for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health, with all my worldly goods I thee endow and so on. In those days, as everyone knew, there was no exception for finding out that you were deceived in your feelings -- and everybody knew you might be, magic or no. Till death us do part. Marriage was pretty much an unbreakable vow in those days. By the laws and customs of that era, Tom owed Merope support as long as she was faithful to him, and I don't think anyone has suggested that she wasn't. Pippin From celizwh at intergate.com Tue May 16 13:51:08 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 13:51:08 -0000 Subject: Scar Speculation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152300 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" wrote: > JPK has stated in an interview that, as things stand, > the last word of the final Book will be "scar". Given > this information has anyone speculated, or does anyone > now want to speculate, what the last SENTENCE will be? houyhnhnm: This is an optimistic speculation. I will leave the pessimistic ones to someone else: Harry gazed at his reflection for a long time, wondering if he would ever get used to the sight of his face without the scar. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 15:57:58 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 15:57:58 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152301 Potioncat wrote: > I pity Merope as well. JKR really turned the tables didn't she? We were expecting a woman who had been cruely used by her husband. Instead we have two victims. Three, actually. Or thousands if you count the WW. > I have to say, I agree with Carol on what Tom ought to do, but I'm not sure society would impose it, under the circumstances. > > Who remembers the book, "Maggie" or "Maggie, a Girl of the Streets."? It's about a young woman who finds herself in a similar position to Merope, written in the 1880s, early 1900s by a famous dead guy.(American, I think.) At any rate, having made the great offense of becoming pregnant, she was left on her own, deserving of all her problems. I think she ended up just like Merope. Dead. Carol responds: Going OT here, that was Stephen Crane (1871-1900, an American), who died at 29 of tuberculosis, writing a naturalistic novel, which he intended to be both sordidly realistically and shocking, causing society to realize that it was pushing girls like Maggie toward prostitution and suicide. Even if they weren't pregnant, such girls were "ruined," considered unfit for marriage or contact with "decent" people (except the men who used them). Not quite the same as Merope, who was married but rejected by her husband, yet she, too, ends up poor and desperate with nowhere to go. (Now if she'd sold that locket sooner and Burke had given her a fair price, she might have been fine, but the story would have been ruined.) > Potioncat: > Why do you suppose Tom Riddle, Sr. never re-married? (Other than JKR thought 3 people sitting in the dining room were quite enough for a teenager to take out?) Did he know Merope had died? Did he know where the baby was? Again, did he know there was a baby? Carol: As I said earlier, I think Tom Sr. must have known that Merope was pregnant (she would have told him, and if she had any sense, waited till the pregnancy was self-evident so he would know she wasn't lying) and she must have hoped that he would feel pity for the child if not for her. If so, she was wrong on both counts. Apparently, he made no inquiry after her or the child. Had he done so, he would have learned that she was dead and that he was free to marry. More irony, or comeuppance for those who like that sort of thing. > Potioncat: > Now, back to love potions themselves. Why did Slughorn have a steaming cauldron of Amortentia sitting on the very desk of teenagers? Let's see, he had Polyjuice near the Ravenclaws, Felix Felicis on his desk, Veritaserum near the Slytherins and Amortentia near the Hufflpuff/Gryffindor table. > > Amortentia is the most powerful love potion in the world. Already made and affecting the students as soon as they sit near it. Harry smells a combination of scents, one at least is firmly connected to the Burrow. He found it to be the most seductive scent ever, and even Ron was grinning lazily. Then Ron seems to be competing with Harry for Hermione's approval. Hermione starts to tell what it smell likes to her, after announcing its aroma depends on "what attracts us", then stops in mid-answer. Right after Potions they go to lunch, and Ginny joins them. Harry notices she smells like the scent in the Amortentia. > > Hmmm...seems the most powerful love potion in the world works by > inhalation. It doesn't cause love of course, but creates an obsession. Does anyone else wonder about the coincidence of this as the story goes on? > > Potioncat, who originally thought things worked out the way they were supposed to, all on their own, but who isn't so sure now. > Carol responds: Interesting observations, but I don't think that inhaling Amortentia creates an obsession, nor would the effects of inhaling it have lasted through the whole book. Ron and Hermione have been attracted to each other since at least GoF and I think before (though I keep seeing scenes from the PoA film in my mind and can't remember whether they're substantiated by the book), and the potion's fragrance depends on what *already* appeals to the person smelling it. I think that Hermione broke off because she realized that the third scent was somehow associated with Ron (wonder what it could be), whereas in Ron and Harry, it helped to stir a growing awareness. (Ron, IMO, is still coming to grips with his feelings for Hermione, starting to recognize them but not sure how to handle them, or the jealousy that comes with them. Harry needs the whiff of Ginny's perfume, which he only half-recognizes until Ginny walks by and he smells it again, to realize that he likes her as more than a sister. Boys!) Anyway, I think that your first instinct is correct and that smelling Amortentia isn't dangerous. As for dangerous potions in a classroom, that's what Potions, and especially NEWT Potions, is all about. (Wonder how it fits in with being an Auror?) Carol, still wondering if Harry's apparent fascination with the HBP's notes on Everlasting Elixirs ("The UnBreakable Vow") goes beyond an affinity with the Prince to a new interest in Potions that could play out in Book 7 From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue May 16 16:01:44 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 16:01:44 -0000 Subject: Ginny and her brothers (was: Ginny's Behavior) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152302 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > > (BTW, whoever said Ron was Victorian and something to the effect of > 'old fashioned', he is. This is the WW. The society hasn't aged as > much as the Muggle world since the Great Seclusion. We see a lot of > old-fashionedness in the WW.) No we don't. That is the bad fanfiction version of the WW. The real WW has oldfashioned dresses and things, but had equality between men and woman centuries before the Muggle world. In the real WW women were head of St. Mungo's, Headmistress of Hogwarts, high raking MoM employees when in the Muggle world they could not even vote. There is no indication whatsoever that the WW has this kind of Victorian morals. Gerry From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 16 16:53:48 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 16:53:48 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152303 > Alla: > > Could you give me an example of Merope being a victim in her > relationship with Tom Riddle? I mean, I don't think anybody would > argue that she was the victim of horrible abuse, but how is it in > any way, shape or form diminishes the wrongness of what she did to > that poor man? > > He did not ASK for his life to be destroyed, as you said he never > remarried. I speculate that he was so traumatised that he was unable > to rebuild his life ever again, basically the woman he loved was > taken away from him, IMO. > > And I am also not talking about Tom Riddle general character, for > all we know as somebody told me he could have been a real jerk in > his relationship with the world in general. But it is irrelevant IMO. > > He did not do anything to Merope, he had a misfortune to be seen by > her. Magpie: Yeah, I have to say I find some of the arguments here disturbing because they seem like just an inversion of the usual "blame the victim" arguments that are so common in real rape cases, only instead of the victim being considered automatically guilty because she's a woman and so sexually asking for it, it seems Tom is automatically guilty because he's a man, and handsome and rich, so can't be the victim. Yet this is exactly what JKR is turning on its head by making Tom the Muggle and Merope the witch. I don't think we're just told Tom never remarried, we're told he rarely left the house after his experience. Lots of rapists were abused growing up, and while this may explain their motivations it does not make a crime any less of a crime, just as Tom's relatively good life doesn't mean a crime committed against him is less of a crime. As far as I can see Merope was in control of her actions every step of the way. It takes two people to make a baby, but of these two people Merope was the one far more in control since Tom was the one with his reason impaired by Love Potions. (As a witch Merope would also have access to birth control as well.) The thing Tom is guilty of taking responsibility for the child created by him. He also leaves his wife when the magic binding her to him wears off. I'd say one of the things clear about Tom Jr.'s life is that he really never knew love, even in conception. It wasn't just his father who did wrong by him and didn't care about him, assuming he knew Tom existed, which he may not have. (We don't hear that he ever tried to find out what happened to Merope, since as far as we know he had trouble even leaving the house after his experience.) If his father either didn't know about him and didn't want to know about him, or saw him as just a symbol of his own abuse, his mother quite possibly couldn't see him at all, because she had trouble seeing anything but what she wanted for herself. We assume she made a good sacrifice in setting Tom free of his love potion, but she may have still been going after her own ends. Iow, she may have begun to resent knowing that Tom only loved her because he was drugged and longed for the "real love" that was freely given. Another thing to remember about the Muggle/Wizard worlds is the different position Witches seemed to have always enjoyed in the WW. Merope herself was cowed at home, but she's not subject to the disapproval or laws of Muggle society of the time. She's not whatever 19th century heroine sounds most sympathetic. She's not a penniless, outcast Muggle girl, she's a Witch. A witch with a lot of disadvantages and psychological problems that make her incapable of going on with life, but not a girl destroyed by sexist Muggle society and seduced by the rich aristocrat. This story is really kind of daring in the way it challenges assumptions and stereotypes (or perhaps some might find it problematic for exactly that reason). Can we fall back on familiar injustices when the power in the situation is flip-flopped? -m From nethwen21 at yahoo.co.uk Tue May 16 15:13:58 2006 From: nethwen21 at yahoo.co.uk (nethwen21) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 15:13:58 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: <20.5491ef17.319a7b0e@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152304 > Julie: > The bottom line really comes down to what each individual person > considers "child abuse" at the level where it must be publicly condemned > and punished... > > That kind of abuse, what many of us here would consider definitive > "child abuse" is what is practiced by Umbridge, who does deserve > to be condemned and punished. And again, we don't all agree on > that definition, and each person is within his or her right to draw > their line where they see fit. But in the WW, and yes, also in the > real world, Umbridge's actions are criminal and punishable, Snape's > are not. Thus Dumbledore is under no moral obligation to condemn > Snape, nor is JKR. (And lack of public condemnation does not > equal approval, IMO, but an acceptance of Snape's nature and > the value of children experiencing such a nature, one which they will > encounter repeatedly in their lives--as JKR so stated.) > Hello everyone, this is my first post here. I would like to say that I totally agree with what Julie has written here. Umbridge's actions are a disgrace to the teaching world. She physically abuses Harry and in the process seems to be getting some sadistic kick out of it by digging deeper and deeper into the boy's flesh. This is real "child abuse" imo and a criminal offence. Professor Snape, on the other hand, is a VERY strict teacher who has exceptionally high standards. Harry and Neville (bless him) are poor students. They do not make the grade and they never will - although Harry of course has extra help what with Hermione doing his homework for him and his acquired Potion's book where he repeatedly cheats throughout the year. *sorry going off on a tangent there lol. I can't stand cheating*. Okay, so what Professor Snape does is humiliates, and punishes weakness, nothing more. He lashes out with his tongue. I do not think such actions warrant being brought before the headmaster and being brought to task. Professor Snape is based on a teacher Ms Rowling had and whom she hated as a pupil. I have had the feeling all along that she does not think of her teacher in this way now and that the major theme in her books is about misjudgement and overcoming prejudice. Harry from the get-go has had it in for Professor Snape, blaming him for everything imaginable and hating him more and more in the process. Thing is Harry's judgements have been WRONG every time. In the final analysis there has to be some sort of closure on this. I believe Harry will have his eyes opened in the last book ... and hopefully it will not be too late! nethwen21 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 17:16:04 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 17:16:04 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152305 Alla wrote: > > Could you give me an example of Merope being a victim in her > relationship with Tom Riddle? I mean, I don't think anybody would > argue that she was the victim of horrible abuse, but how is it in > any way, shape or form diminishes the wrongness of what she did to > that poor man? > > He did not ASK for his life to be destroyed, as you said he never > remarried. I speculate that he was so traumatised that he was unable > to rebuild his life ever again, basically the woman he loved was > taken away from him, IMO. > > And I am also not talking about Tom Riddle general character, for > all we know as somebody told me he could have been a real jerk in > his relationship with the world in general. But it is irrelevant IMO. > > Carol said that it took an act of courage from Merope to stop > feeding him love potion. > > Well, maybe, although the fact that she indeed stopped makes me also > be MORE hard on her, not LESS. Because IMO it means that she cannot > claim "insanity" or something like that as her defense. > > To me it means that she knew right from wrong and that makes in my > book her crime even more horrifying. > > > As I said, I speculate he was too traumatised to ever think about > building relationship with anybody ever again. > > I can easily imagine him replaying in his head what Merope did to > him and thinking that his former love Cecilia can be just like > Merope and can also "hoodwink" him. I can easily imagine him > thinking that maybe he also does not love Cecilia, but only thinks > he does. Carol responds: First, I'm very curious as to whether any *male* list members would classify what happened to Tom Sr. as "rape." IMO, it's more like seduction and entrapment into marriage (admittedly not justifiable or moral actions), and it's his inability to marry the woman of his choice that upsets him and causes him to be a recluse in his parents' house. Most men simply don't suffer PSTS after a sexual experience (or more than one) that they don't even remember. IMO, he finds himself trapped in a marriage to an ugly, poverty-stricken girl that he has scorned and laughed at, one with even more disgusting relatives, and who turns out to have literally bewitched him. To be fair, he's probably afraid that any child of hers will turn out like Morfin and he can't tell the truth about what happened, so he claims that he was "hoodwinked" into marrying her, implying that she told him she was pregnant before the marriage. However, if that were the case and she were not really pregnant, he probably could have had the marriage annulled even in 1930s England. The villagers must have wondered why he didn't do so--or realized that she was really pregnant and that he was trapped into the marriage, like it or not. Divorce would probably not, at that time, have been an option. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) I doubt very much that he would have been too traumatized to remarry if he had known that Merope was dead. He simply didn't bother to inquire about her, and consequently never knew that he was free. If Tom were merely the victim of unwanted sex with a girl he was repulsed by, he could have gotten over it just as men get over having sex with girls they don't know after having had too many drinks, or encounters with prostitutes that they later regret but don't spend their lives reliving and repenting. Men don't make a big deal about losing their virginity or undesirable sex partners unless there are other consequences like venereal disease or the woman's pregnancy. IMO, it wasn't the sex so much as the marriage that in his view ruined his life. But he has lost his status as the village's most eligible bachelor and his chance to marry a pretty girl who shares his social class and values (such as they are). It's like Lucius Malfoy tricked into marrying an ugly Muggle--utter disgrace from his point of view. So, yes, Tom's a victim, but that doesn't justify his treatment of Merope, much less of their innocent child. (How is allowing his child to grow up unacknowledged in an orphanage better than placing a child with unloving relatives like the Dursleys? Tom Sr. has no way of knowing that his child isn't being abused because he doesn't investigate, and he himself is guilty of neglect.) I didn't say that Tom Sr. abused Merope, except by abandoning her to her fate, which he must have known was far worse than his. (See previous post.) Once he got over the initial outrage and humiliation, he should have seen that she, a lifelong victim of abuse, only wanted to be loved, that she was sorry for her mistake, that as a fellow human being, she deserved to be treated with compassion even though she had hurt him. Does being sorry and trying to make amends for a mistake count for nothing? With her upbringing, it's a wonder that she ever realized that he had rights, too, and that he didn't really love her and ought to be released from the effects of the potion. To be wholly rejected, to be thrown onto her own very limited resources without money or shelter or help of any kind was just cruel. If Merope's having been a victim doesn't justify her treatment of Tom, which grew out of an unrealistic desire to be loved which she repented and tried to undo, how does her half-unwitting and repented abuse of him excuse his treatment of her? He lost his marital prospects; she was condemned, along with her unborn child, to a life of misery. I don't understand how you can condemn the Dursleys' treatment of Harry and not condemn Tom Sr.'s treatment of Tom Jr., if not of Merope, who was young, uneducated, depressed, poverty-stricken and helpless, with or without her magic, which could provide neither food nor money. No one deserves that sort of life. Two wrongs do not make a right. If your wife or husband abuses you, you do not have the right to abuse him or her in return. Merope, after having sinned or erred or whatever you want to call it, repented. She did what was right, not what was easy, by telling Tom the truth. He, however, did not forgive her or relent in his cold, cruel punishment of her transgression. He blamed her, abandoned her and their child, and went off to live with his parents, not providing her with a penny. He did what was easy, not what was right. He should not have taken revenge, allowing her to suffer and die. He should have set aside his own injured pride and prospects and provided for them. He had money. They did not. He had a moral obligation to care for his child regardless of the circumstances of its conception. And his injuries did not justify deliberate cruelty and neglect toward someone who had asked his forgiveness. Compassion. Mercy. Forgiveness. That's what this book is about, as Dumbledore, the champion of second chances, repeatedly demonstrates. Tom Sr. failed to show any of those virtues, and by so doing, he condemned Merope to death, his child to life in an orphanage, and himself to unproductive self-pity and seclusion. Carol, who can understand Tom Sr.'s conduct but cannot condone it and does not think that any mistake should be punished with misery like Merope's From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 17:35:18 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 17:35:18 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152306 Nethwen21: Harry and Neville (bless him) are poor students. They do not make the grade and they never will - although Harry of course has extra help what with Hermione doing his homework for him and his acquired Potion's book where he repeatedly cheats throughout the year. *sorry going off on a tangent there lol. I can't stand cheating*. Alla: Welcome to the list. I promised myself to stay away for a while from the discussions about Snape's teaching skills, but I guess "for a while" had passed. Is "Exceeds expectations" acceptable grade by your standards? Because that is exactly what Harry got in OOP, when Snape was not there. Nethwen21: Okay, so what Professor Snape does is humiliates, and punishes weakness, nothing more. He lashes out with his tongue. I do not think such actions warrant being brought before the headmaster and being brought to task. Alla: That is included in teachers "to do list" ? to humiliate and punish weaknesses? Could you tell me by the way, what weakness of Harry Snape was punishing when Harry begged to see Dumbledore to tell him about Barty Sr. condition and who gave Snape the right to do so, since I don't remember Harry being in class at that moment, Nethwen21: Professor Snape is based on a teacher Ms Rowling had and whom she hated as a pupil. I have had the feeling all along that she does not think of her teacher in this way now and that the major theme in her books is about misjudgement and overcoming prejudice. Alla: Wound't it be interesting if she DOES think of her teacher that way still and will portray in Snape what teachers like him will get in fictional reality if not always in real life? Nethwen21: Harry from the get-go has had it in for Professor Snape, blaming him for everything imaginable and hating him more and more in the process. Alla: Oh, I thought I read about Snape attacking the child who knows zero about the wizarding world on the very first lesson. He always reminds me of the vicious dog, when I read that lesson. Nethwen21: Thing is Harry's judgements have been WRONG every time. In the final analysis there has to be some sort of closure on this. I believe Harry will have his eyes opened in the last book ... and hopefully it will not be too late! Alla: That is interesting. Harry always told Dumbledore that he does not trust Snape, DD told Harry that he trusts Snape. Dumbledore is now killed by Snape. I would not discount the possibility that in the book 7 Harry's judgment about Snape will be possibly validated, but of course unfortunately Harry will forgive him. That I know, but I am putting my money on Harry forgiving a GUILTY person, NOT an innocent one. JMO, Alla From spirittalks at gmail.com Tue May 16 17:55:36 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 13:55:36 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption References: Message-ID: <014501c67911$f03fb630$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 152307 nethwen2: Professor Snape, on the other hand, is a VERY strict teacher who has exceptionally high standards. Harry and Neville (bless him) are poor students. They do not make the grade and they never will - although Harry of course has extra help what with Hermione doing his homework for him and his acquired Potion's book where he repeatedly cheats throughout the year. *sorry going off on a tangent there lol. I can't stand cheating*. Okay, so what Professor Snape does is humiliates, and punishes weakness, nothing more. He lashes out with his tongue. I do not think such actions warrant being brought before the headmaster and being brought to task. Kim: I have to disagree with you here. From moment one in Snape's class, before Harry had any chance at all to prove himself an able or poor student, Snape humiliated him. On many occassions his tactics of humiliating Harry and Neville reached cruelty levels. And when Snape gives Harry zeros for potions that are better than those made by some others in the class, he's not just humiliating a poor student. Harry was not so poor a student that he was not doing work that would at least get him half credit, along with nearly everyone else in the class. Snape gave him zeros on several occassions that should have been given at least some credit. I don't see him as merely humiliating a poor student and punishing weakness (which in itself is an abhorrent thought). If there's one thing I'd change about the books it would be that Dumbledore would step in and refuse to allow abuse of the students in his care. Kim From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 17:52:44 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 17:52:44 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152308 > Carol responds: > First, I'm very curious as to whether any *male* list members would > classify what happened to Tom Sr. as "rape." IMO, it's more like > seduction and entrapment into marriage (admittedly not justifiable or > moral actions), and it's his inability to marry the woman of his > choice that upsets him and causes him to be a recluse in his parents' > house. Alla: Why is that? He was forced to sleep with somebody who he would not sleep with while in his right mind. How is it not rape? Would you say that if woman would drank a day rape drug in her drink and forced to sleep with someone, it is not rape too? Carol: > If Tom were merely the victim of unwanted sex with a girl he was > repulsed by, he could have gotten over it just as men get over having > sex with girls they don't know after having had too many drinks, or > encounters with prostitutes that they later regret but don't spend > their lives reliving and repenting. Men don't make a big deal about > losing their virginity or undesirable sex partners unless there are > other consequences like venereal disease or the woman's pregnancy. > IMO, it wasn't the sex so much as the marriage that in his view ruined > his life. Alla: What are you basing your conclusions on? He was violated on the daily basis for months and you are saying that he should have gotten over it? Just because he is a man? Would you expect from woman to just get over unwanted sex too? Carol: Once he got over the initial outrage and humiliation, > he should have seen that she, a lifelong victim of abuse, only wanted > to be loved, that she was sorry for her mistake, that as a fellow > human being, she deserved to be treated with compassion even though > she had hurt him. Does being sorry and trying to make amends for a > mistake count for nothing? Alla: Mistake? Trap another human being in her bed is a mistake? In my book it is a crime, a horrendous crime. And no, being sorry for rape does not count for much, although I don't remember her saying that she is sorry either. Carol: He lost his marital prospects; she > was condemned, along with her unborn child, to a life of misery. I > don't understand how you can condemn the Dursleys' treatment of Harry > and not condemn Tom Sr.'s treatment of Tom Jr., if not of Merope, who > was young, uneducated, depressed, poverty-stricken and helpless, with > or without her magic, which could provide neither food nor money. No > one deserves that sort of life. Two wrongs do not make a right. If > your wife or husband abuses you, you do not have the right to abuse > him or her in return. Alla: Um, easy. I am sorry you don't see it. I don't remember Harry forcing Dursleys to sleep with him ( shudders at the mental image). Tom Riddle did not ASK to be Merope husband. He never left his house after she was through with him. Carol: > Merope, after having sinned or erred or whatever you want to call it, > repented. She did what was right, not what was easy, by telling Tom > the truth. Alla: Or as Magpie said she was still doing after her own means, because she did not like drugged husband anymore. Carol: He, however, did not forgive her or relent in his cold, > cruel punishment of her transgression. He blamed her, abandoned her > and their child, and went off to live with his parents, not providing > her with a penny. He did what was easy, not what was right. Alla: I cannot imagine a worst punishment for rape victim that staring in the face of the child conceived under such circumstances Carol: He had a moral obligation to care for his > child regardless of the circumstances of its conception. And his > injuries did not justify deliberate cruelty and neglect toward someone > who had asked his forgiveness. Alla: Not in my book. In my book he suffered enough without being imposed on with his child and I don't remember anywhere in canon Merope asking him for forgiveness, by the way. She stopped feeding him the potion that does NOT equal forgiveness in my book. That is stopping committing the crime, that is all. As I said I think it is great if he was able to care for his child, because nobody could argue that the baby is innocent indeed, but to IMPOSE on him? Nope, I very strongly disagree. > Carol, who can understand Tom Sr.'s conduct but cannot condone it and > does not think that any mistake should be punished with misery like > Merope's Alla: So, if the places were switched and Merope was young and rich and beautiful and Tom Riddle was ugly wizard who slipped her love potion, would you still think that Merope had any kind of obligation to care for the child, or is it only because poor Tom is a man and for some reason should just get over the rape? You know, I have to forcibly remind myself that Merope was a victim of abuse and needs to be pitied at least for that, otherwise I would hate her a great deal. But poor Tom had NOTHING to do with her abuse, he wanted to live HIS life and she took this possibility away from him. > > Pippin: >> Till death us do part. Marriage was pretty much an unbreakable vow in > those days. > > By the laws and customs of that era, Tom owed Merope support as > long as she was faithful to him, and I don't think anyone has > suggested that she wasn't. Alla: Magpie wrote really well about law and customs of that era. I also don't see Merope as poor girl of the 19th century. but if I understand you correctly you are saying that marriage under the influence of Love potion is still to be honored. Or you are saying that Love potion wore off at the day of marriage. I wonder how often Merope drugged this poor guy at that "joyful" occasion. Every hour? Fifteen minutes? Alla, wants to find appropriate words to describe how she feels but really having trouble. I am having trouble to say that Merope ASKED to be pregnant, but I have no problem saying that she indeed asked for all the misery she got after she was done with Tom Riddle. From lunalovegood at shaw.ca Tue May 16 18:22:38 2006 From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (tbernhard2000) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 18:22:38 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152309 nethwen21 wrote: > what Professor Snape does is humiliate, and punish weakness, nothing more. Nothing more? Humiliation, at the QWC, for example, was a prime tool of the Death Eaters. Were they "just" humiliating muggles, and punishing their "weakness" in terms of magic? Humiliation is ever a tool of the latest brutal power to silence the masses - Snape uses it to silence his classes. But punishing weakness - when does that ever get smart? Besides, it's not weakness Snape is punishing, but contrariness. He shuts up those who disagree. Nothing at all to do with weakness - rather, say it is strength that he abhors, or celebrity other than his own. He abhorred James' strength, after all, all those years ago, and immediately launches in on Harry's celebrity status. No, Snape ignores weakness, it's beneath him. But strength, that he wants to beat down and humiliate. What a jerk! > Professor Snape is based on a teacher Ms Rowling had and whom she hated as a pupil. I have had the feeling all along that she does not think of her teacher in this way now and that the major theme in her books is about misjudgement and overcoming prejudice. And I think she feels strongly enough about this teacher that she has immortalized his nastiness in books that will be read for centuries. Nowhere has she said she thinks differently about him now, nor does the fact that she has said Snape was based on a teacher she had make her relationship with said teacher a model for the relationship between Snape and the trio in the books. She's added some art here. dan From nifer819 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 18:36:19 2006 From: nifer819 at yahoo.com (nifer819) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 18:36:19 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152310 I had always presumed that Krum invited Hermione because he saw in her some characteristics that would allow him to get through the evening of the Yule Ball with relatively little discomfort. Specifically, Hermione did not fawn all over him like every other girl in the castle, she was discrete, and she is actually pretty. For Krum who is arriving at Hogwarts at the height of fame and popularity, having just competed in the World Cup, the attention is overwhelming. He is seeking respite from all this in the library where people are forced to be quiet (or suffer the wrath of Madam Pince). He notices Hermione there perhaps at first because she is always there, but I had assumed she stood out to Krum because she was unlike other girls because she wasn't persuing him for an autograph with whatever was handy, including lipsticks. She was there for her own business. While other girls were going to the library with the intenion of attracting Krum's attention and striking up a conversation with him, Hermione was not. Krum was also bound to notice that Hermione was very frequently in the company of Harry Potter. Krum and the Durmstrang students have to know who Harry is, as the whole world is supposed to know about Harry. Krum is finding himself in a position of such heightened fame that he can't go anywhere without attracting attention and being harrassed by fans. He isn't going to want to spend time with someone who is going to blab all the details of his converstation to the anyone who will listen. Seeing Hermione with Harry may indicate to Krum that here is a person who has the discretion needed to remain friends with a famous person. Despite Harry and Ron's ability to notice it, I suspect that Hermione is becoming at least a little bit pretty. She has never been described by JKR as ugly, just as having bushy hair and longish front teeth. Now, Hermione has taken care of the teeth issue following the hex she was hit with and as for the hair, that is something she can control as well, she just feels it's more effort that she wants to put out on a daily basis. In my opinion, the bottom line was that Krum was told he had to have date for the ball just as Harry was. With that in mind, Krum saw Hermione as a pretty safe choice for the aforementioned reasons. And a bonus would have been that once he started talking to her, he'd realize that she knew little about quidditch and then there would be even less pressure to "the quidditch star" around her. He would have a hope of actually having a pleasant evening. After the evening was over, he could still be friends with her and perhaps more. nifer819. From katbofaye at aol.com Tue May 16 19:14:53 2006 From: katbofaye at aol.com (katssirius) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 19:14:53 -0000 Subject: Ginny/brothers/not old fashioned but old predjuces Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152311 I found the whole Fleur and Mrs. Weasley problem to be one of JKR's weaker moments. We are supposed to believe that a Tri wizard champion, the best student at Beauxbatons, who is also incredibly beautiful is not good enough for Bill. Their final scene by Bill's bed implies that they all thought Fleur only wanted Bill for his looks and her devotion in spite of his hideous face finally convinces them that she really is in love. Come on. Who believes Fleur wanted Bill for his looks and not the other way around. I was shocked back in GOF when Mrs. Weasley turns on Hermione because of Rita's stories. She knows Hermione, she knows Rita and the Prophet, she knows Harry, and she comes down on a 15 year old girl as the obvious one at fault without bothering to check it out first. In OOTP she has very little patience with Tonks who appears to be well liked by everyone else. More often than not the Weasley children treat women as unintelligent and second class with their only value coming from their looks. They did not learn this from their dad. We do not see any negative treatment of women by Mr. Weasley. He is respectful. Mrs. Weasley has to be the source. Mrs. Weasley appears to hate the kind of woman that she is: a strong, forceful,loyal, leader. JKR writes the twins, Ron, and Ginny as people who are hostile to women and judge them only by their looks. In COS, the Twins comment on the DADA booklist and in GOF they urge Ron to get a date before all the "good ones" are gone. Ron and Ginny are by far the worse. Ron is a caveman in is belief in what makes a good date. She just has to be attractive. Ron and others cruelly attack Eloise Midgin for a skin condition, no boys are ever attacked in the same way. Ginny's treatment of Fleur is a huge step backward in time to when it was acceptable to say all women competed for men's attention to get their MRS degree. JKR's portrayal of women is flayed in these books. Fleur is isolated at the Weasley's away from her own family. She is shown as someone trying to share one of the biggest events in her life and in Bill's life. This is not self centered. It is a big event even more so in a population of dwindling numbers where reproduction early is vital. Even DD spends time in celebration and normal life rather than just chasing DEs. My question is What does Fleur want with Bill Weasley? She can have anyone, so why doesn't he tell his family to shape up if she is so important to him. katssirius From juli17 at aol.com Tue May 16 20:59:39 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:59:39 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152312 > > > Carol responds: > > First, I'm very curious as to whether any *male* list members would > > classify what happened to Tom Sr. as "rape." IMO, it's more like > > seduction and entrapment into marriage (admittedly not justifiable > or > > moral actions), and it's his inability to marry the woman of his > > choice that upsets him and causes him to be a recluse in his > parents' > > house. > > Alla: > > Why is that? He was forced to sleep with somebody who he would not > sleep with while in his right mind. How is it not rape? Would you say > that if woman would drank a day rape drug in her drink and forced to > sleep with someone, it is not rape too? Julie: I don't think Tom's situation is analagous to rape because no physical incapacity or coercion was involved, rather his emotions were played with. It is more analagous to a man telling a woman he loves her and wants to marry her just to get sex. That sexual relationship is based on deceit, just as Tom and Merope's sexual relationship is based on deceit, on the effect of the love potion making Tom believe he cared for her. Just as a woman would be justifiably angry at being tricked into believing a man loved her, I think Tom is justifiably angry at being tricked into believing he loved Merope. But I still don't see it as rape. > > Carol: > > > If Tom were merely the victim of unwanted sex with a girl he was > > repulsed by, he could have gotten over it just as men get over > having > > sex with girls they don't know after having had too many drinks, or > > encounters with prostitutes that they later regret but don't spend > > their lives reliving and repenting. Men don't make a big deal about > > losing their virginity or undesirable sex partners unless there are > > other consequences like venereal disease or the woman's pregnancy. > > IMO, it wasn't the sex so much as the marriage that in his view > ruined > > his life. > > Alla: > > What are you basing your conclusions on? He was violated on the daily > basis for months and you are saying that he should have gotten over > it? Just because he is a man? Would you expect from woman to just get > over unwanted sex too? Julie: Again he wasn't violated, IMO, he was tricked, into believing he loved her because she was gorgeous and desirable in his eyes, when she really wasn't once he saw how she really looked. > > Carol: > Once he got over the initial outrage and humiliation, > > he should have seen that she, a lifelong victim of abuse, only > wanted > > to be loved, that she was sorry for her mistake, that as a fellow > > human being, she deserved to be treated with compassion even though > > she had hurt him. Does being sorry and trying to make amends for a > > mistake count for nothing? > > > Alla: > > Mistake? Trap another human being in her bed is a mistake? In my book > it is a crime, a horrendous crime. > And no, being sorry for rape does not count for much, although I > don't remember her saying that she is sorry either. Julie: He was tricked into her bed, as a woman can often be tricked into a man's bed by lies and manipulation. It's dishonest, deceitful, perhaps criminal in some sense, but it's not rape. > > Carol: > > Merope, after having sinned or erred or whatever you want to call > it, > > repented. She did what was right, not what was easy, by telling Tom > > the truth. > > Alla: > > Or as Magpie said she was still doing after her own means, because > she did not like drugged husband anymore. Julie: Er, huh? If you mean she hoped he would love her as she was, now that he'd gotten to know her, I agree that she probably held that hope. She still could have kept him under the love potion forever, but she chose not to, and the only reason for that is because she knew it was wrong. So she took the risk and did the right thing. Which doesn't excuse doing the wrong thing first, but it does count for something, IMO. > Carol: > He, however, did not forgive her or relent in his cold, > > cruel punishment of her transgression. He blamed her, abandoned her > > and their child, and went off to live with his parents, not > providing > > her with a penny. He did what was easy, not what was right. > > Alla: > > I cannot imagine a worst punishment for rape victim that staring in > the face of the child conceived under such circumstances Julie: It wasn't rape (sorry for the broken record approach, but it wasn't). However, the child was conceived under false pretenses, again, just as a woman could get pregnant assuming a man loved her, only to have that man reveal he never loved her and just used her for sex. BTW, Tom doesn't have to stare the child in the face. He can simply help provide for its care, or help arrange an adoption if Merope is unable or unwilling to care for the child. > > Carol: > > He had a moral obligation to care for his > > child regardless of the circumstances of its conception. And his > > injuries did not justify deliberate cruelty and neglect toward > someone > > who had asked his forgiveness. > > Alla: > Not in my book. In my book he suffered enough without being imposed > on with his child and I don't remember anywhere in canon Merope > asking him for forgiveness, by the way. She stopped feeding him the > potion that does NOT equal forgiveness in my book. That is stopping > committing the crime, that is all. > As I said I think it is great if he was able to care for his child, > because nobody could argue that the baby is innocent indeed, but to > IMPOSE on him? > > Nope, I very strongly disagree. Julie: We have *no* clue what conversation transpired between Merope and Tom, though it's a good bet she did beg for forgiveness, as she certainly wanted him to stay with her. Granting forgiveness is of course his choice, and clearly he didn't do so since he left and had no further contact with her or the child that we know of. An unwanted conception is also not the child's fault. who is completely innocent, as you say. And doing the right thing over the easy thing is *almost always* an imposition of some sort, or the choice wouldn't have to be made, would it? Tom perhaps had no legal responsibility to do so, given that the marriage and the child's conception were founded on deceit, but morally it would have been the right thing to do. And doing the right thing over the easy thi > > > Carol, who can understand Tom Sr.'s conduct but cannot condone it > and > > does not think that any mistake should be punished with misery like > > Merope's > > Alla: > > So, if the places were switched and Merope was young and rich and > beautiful and Tom Riddle was ugly wizard who slipped her love potion, > would you still think that Merope had any kind of obligation to care > for the child, or is it only because poor Tom is a man and for some > reason should just get over the rape? Julie: I think she would have a moral obligation to make sure the child was cared for. She could choose to ignore that obligation, and society might not even condemn her for it, but that doesn't make it morally right. Alla: > You know, I have to forcibly remind myself that Merope was a victim > of abuse and needs to be pitied at least for that, otherwise I would > hate her a great deal. But poor Tom had NOTHING to do with her abuse, > he wanted to live HIS life and she took this possibility away from > him. Julie: Hmm. I don't have to forcibly remind myself that Merope was the victim of abuse, because the moment I read about her horrible, loveless life I couldn't feel anything but sympathy for her. Even after she used the love potion I felt sympathy for her, because she was driven by desperation and a desire for love and acceptance that should have been her birthright as a human but which she'd never known. Yes, she was wrong to do it, but her intent wasn't to harm, so I can both condemn her action while not fully condemning her. But that's just me :-) Julie, who thinks Merope may have asked for the misery she received from Tom, but only because she had no idea how to ask for something she so desired but had never experienced an ounce of throughout her life--love. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue May 16 21:06:04 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 21:06:04 -0000 Subject: Ginny/brothers/not old fashioned but old predjuces In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152313 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katssirius" wrote: She is shown as someone > trying to share one of the biggest events in her life and in Bill's > life. This is not self centered. It is a big event even more so in > a population of dwindling numbers where reproduction early is > vital. Even DD spends time in celebration and normal life rather > than just chasing DEs. My question is What does Fleur want with > Bill Weasley? She can have anyone, so why doesn't he tell his > family to shape up if she is so important to him. > > katssirius > p. 91 Bloomsburry edition: ' I was so pleased to 'ear you would be coming - zere isn't much to do 'ere unless you like cooking and chickens! 'I am theenking of dressing zem in pale gold - pink would of course be 'orrible with Ginny' air -' 'She 'as let 'erself go, zat Tonks,' mused Fleur, examining her own stunning reflection in the back of a teaspoon. both p. 126 p. 313 Eez eet over? said Fleur loudly. Thank goodness, what an orrible -' Never, ever in these episodes do we see Fleur ever paying attention to anything outside her own world. Shortsighted and impolite. If you are with your in laws to get to know them it is rather impolite to tell another gueast how boring you find it. Yes, red and pink don't go together but is there a ruder way to say so? Yes, Tonks is letting herself go, but even Fleur must have heard she lost her cousin whom she loved very much and was severely injured herself at the beginning of the summer. Well, it is obvious mrs. Weasly loved the broadcast, it meant very much to her. Did Fleur have to say so very loudly how much she hated it? I literaly cannot find one nice or even polite remark that is made by Fleur in the whole book. No wonder his family thinks she cannot really love anyone because she seems to be only interested in herself. Gerry From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Tue May 16 21:17:30 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 21:17:30 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152314 > Julie: > Again he wasn't violated, IMO, he was tricked, into believing he > loved her because she was gorgeous and desirable in his eyes, when > she really wasn't once he saw how she really looked. > Gerry So he finds out he has been sleeping with somebody he finds totally repellent and it is not rape? I think it is rape, I think he panicked and felt violated and besmirched when he found out what had happened to him. I can easily imagine him running out as fast as he could without looking back - ever. > > > > Carol: > > Once he got over the initial outrage and humiliation, > > > he should have seen that she, a lifelong victim of abuse, only > > wanted > > > to be loved, that she was sorry for her mistake, that as a fellow > > > human being, she deserved to be treated with compassion even > though > > > she had hurt him. Does being sorry and trying to make amends for a > > > mistake count for nothing? Gerry You assume he knew anything about her background. You assume he actually understood in what kind of psychological environment she grew up. You also assume that he could see she only wanted love. It is equally possible that she never talked about her past, that he knew nothing about her and that when the effects of the potions were gone he saw this ugly, dumb, nasty witch who had enchanted him and tricked him into marriage. And even if he understood all that he was in no way obliged to have anything to do with her again. She was a victim, sure, but why would it have been her victim's duty to help her? After all, she was a witch and could be supposed to look after herself. > Julie: > Hmm. I don't have to forcibly remind myself that Merope was the > victim of abuse, because the moment I read about her horrible, > loveless life I couldn't feel anything but sympathy for her. Even > after she used the love potion I felt sympathy for her, because she > was driven by desperation and a desire for love and acceptance that > should have been her birthright as a human but which she'd never > known. Yes, she was wrong to do it, but her intent wasn't to harm, so > I can both condemn her action while not fully condemning her. But > that's just me :-) I totally agree with that, but I don't agree it is Tom who should give the compassion, the forgiveness or the love. > Gerry From orgone9 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 12:39:02 2006 From: orgone9 at yahoo.com (Len Jaffe) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 05:39:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Scar Speculation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060516123902.21853.qmail@web80603.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152315 steven1965aaa: last word of the final Book will be "scar". [ edit] want to speculate, what the last SENTENCE will be? Len now: I think you may have misread that some where. I have it on good authority* that the last words will be "his car." Len. *A little green man told me From bawilson at citynet.net Tue May 16 18:44:05 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (bawilson at citynet.net) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 14:44:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: At an Elf's request. . . Message-ID: <10257524.1147805045594.JavaMail.SYSTEM@webmail> No: HPFGUIDX 152316 I am reposting this as it got scrambled the first time: Lupinlore wrote: > the detestable thing would be NOT to deal with these issues. Sorry, > but any work that approves of the abuse of children is, IMO, > reprehensible, and good for nothing but mulch. Leslie41: "But Rowling doesn't "approve" of Snape's behavior. When asked why Dumbledore allows Snape to teach, she basically said that "there are all sorts of lessons in life; horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!" Snape's behavior towards children is at the very least mean- spirited, but one of the lessons children learn from Rowling is that mean-spirited teachers and students and all sorts of other people exist in the world, and they don't always receive the punishment we think they should. I have a daughter, and the last thing I want her to think is that people always get what they deserve. They don't, and thinking so, or thinking that literature (especially for children) should portray it as such is at best naive." BAW: Please tell me when Snape committed child abuse? I don't remember him ever doing so. I've seen real child abuse in my work, and nothing that Sanpe has done comes even close. Is he a mean, nasty person? Yes. Would I want him teaching my child? No, but. . . . I had a teacher somewhat like Snape once. But, for all his faults, his students LEARNED THE SUBJECT. The man I am thinking of frequently was heard to say, "Teaching is not a popularity contest." So, while given a choice between a nice and effective teacher and a mean and effective one, I'd certainly chose the former. But between a nice but ineffective teacher and a nasty but effective one, I'd probably choose the latter. BAW From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 21:32:35 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 21:32:35 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152317 Julie: I don't think Tom's situation is analagous to rape because no physical incapacity or coercion was involved, rather his emotions were played with. It is more analagous to a man telling a woman he loves her and wants to marry her just to get sex. That sexual relationship is based on deceit, just as Tom and Merope's sexual relationship is based on deceit, on the effect of the love potion making Tom believe he cared for her. Just as a woman would be justifiably angry at being tricked into believing a man loved her, I think Tom is justifiably angry at being tricked into believing he loved Merope. But I still don't see it as rape. Alla: I disagree. In the situation you describe man or woman can still CHOOSE whether to believe those lies or trickery or not. Granted, the liar can play their part very well, but IMO there is still a choice. The person under the influence of love potion has absolutely no choice but to feel "affection" for the person who drugs the other person, no? Just as in rape there is absolutely no choice for other person involved. I don't remember canon supporting the argument that love potions can be overcomed somehow? Julie: Again he wasn't violated, IMO, he was tricked, into believing he loved her because she was gorgeous and desirable in his eyes, when she really wasn't once he saw how she really looked. Alla: But what's the difference here? Is there any? He had no choice but to have sex with her the way I see it. > Julie: BTW, Tom doesn't have to stare the child in the face. He can simply help provide for its care, or help arrange an adoption if Merope is unable or unwilling to care for the child. Alla: Sure, he can and I would think that he is a great man if he did so, it would be very admirable, but since he did not do so, I think that he is a hurt man, broken even, since if I may say again he almost never left the house after he came back. That is to me the behaviour of the trauma victim. Julie: We have *no* clue what conversation transpired between Merope and Tom, though it's a good bet she did beg for forgiveness, as she certainly wanted him to stay with her. Granting forgiveness is of course his choice, and clearly he didn't do so since he left and had no further contact with her or the child that we know of. Alla: Of course. It is possible, I was just saying that there is no such conversation described. And if I may say again, we don't even know if Tom knew of Merope's pregnancy. Not that I would think worse of him, if he did knew, but who knows, maybe indeed he was such a good man that he would have cared for the child which Merope beared. > Alla: > > So, if the places were switched and Merope was young and rich and > beautiful and Tom Riddle was ugly wizard who slipped her love potion, > would you still think that Merope had any kind of obligation to care > for the child, or is it only because poor Tom is a man and for some > reason should just get over the rape? Julie: I think she would have a moral obligation to make sure the child was cared for. She could choose to ignore that obligation, and society might not even condemn her for it, but that doesn't make it morally right. Alla: Okay, fair enough. This is at least consistent position. I don't agree with it at all, but I understand. Julie: Hmm. I don't have to forcibly remind myself that Merope was the victim of abuse, because the moment I read about her horrible, loveless life I couldn't feel anything but sympathy for her. Even after she used the love potion I felt sympathy for her, because she was driven by desperation and a desire for love and acceptance that should have been her birthright as a human but which she'd never known. Yes, she was wrong to do it, but her intent wasn't to harm, so I can both condemn her action while not fully condemning her. But that's just me :-) Gerry: I totally agree with that, but I don't agree it is Tom who should give the compassion, the forgiveness or the love. Alla: I really like what Gerry said. What I meant is that I have to remind myself that she is a victim of abuse after I read what she did to Tom. Since I said that I see it as rape, I can see her upbringing as explanation, but not as justification of what she did at all. She loses all my empathy when I read those scenes, that is why I have to remind myself that she suffered at home in order to not have completely one sided picture of her in my head, because if I would have only read about her and Tom without her upbringing, well then I would see her close to monster, frankly. And I don't see how her intent was not to harm if she knew that Tom loved another woman. JMO, Alla From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 16 21:39:58 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 21:39:58 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152318 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tbernhard2000" wrote: > Humiliation is ever a > tool of the latest brutal power to silence the masses - Snape uses it to silence his classes. ... Besides, it's not weakness Snape is punishing, but contrariness. He shuts up those who disagree. Nothing at all to do with weakness - rather, say it is strength that he abhors, Tonks: And exactly how else is a teacher to control a class or a student that is out of line? He is to intimidate them. I see nothing wrong with that. The little brats should know their place and stay in it. If they step out of line they should be darn happy that it is not like in the old days. The days that Flitch loved. Snape has a right to control his class. And he does it well. They don't have to like him, they just have to obey him. Shut their mouth, listen and learn. Give `um hell, Severus. Ah, we haven't argued about Snape's teaching style in what, a month or two. It never gets us anywhere. And I know I shouldn't get into the fray but sometimes it is hard to resist, isn't it? Tonks_op From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 16 21:43:45 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 21:43:45 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152319 > Julie: > I don't think Tom's situation is analagous to rape because no > physical incapacity or coercion was involved, rather his emotions > were played with. It is more analagous to a man telling a woman he > loves her and wants to marry her just to get sex. That sexual > relationship is based on deceit, just as Tom and Merope's sexual > relationship is based on deceit, on the effect of the love potion > making Tom believe he cared for her. Magpie: Of course physical incapacity and coercion is involved-that's what a love potion does. It interferes with Tom physically and imposes a different will upon his own. If a man tells a woman he loves her and wants to marry her for sex, the man is lying about his own feelings, not controlling the will of the woman. Julie: Just as a woman would be > justifiably angry at being tricked into believing a man loved her, I > think Tom is justifiably angry at being tricked into believing he > loved Merope. But I still don't see it as rape. Magpie: Whether or not we call it rape, Tom was not tricked into believing he loved Merope. He was forced to feel love for Merope through drugs. It crosses the line from manipulation to physically interfering with another person's will, violating their self. That, I think, is why many readers connect it to rape, not simply because of the sexual aspect but because it turns a person into an object for another person. The Imperius curse too can be described as tricking a person into believing they want to do something, but it's actually taking over the person's will. > Julie: > Again he wasn't violated, IMO, he was tricked, into believing he > loved her because she was gorgeous and desirable in his eyes, when > she really wasn't once he saw how she really looked. Magpie: He was absolutely violated. What you're describing is more like a glamour, where Merope turns herself into someone beautiful that Tom finds attractive, but that is not what she really looks like. This analogy also interestingly is all about Tom being shallow; it's hard not to think that if Tom was a better person he'd either not be fooled by the glamour or would still love Merope when the glamour wore off. However, that is not the case with a love potion. A love potion does not trick Tom into thinking a situation is different than it is, it forces him to feel something he doesn't feel, like slipping someone a drug. It violates him physically so that he is no longer competent to act in his own interest. She is controlling his reactions through her Potions. > Julie: > He was tricked into her bed, as a woman can often be tricked into a > man's bed by lies and manipulation. It's dishonest, deceitful, > perhaps criminal in some sense, but it's not rape. Magpie: Tom was not tricked by lies or manipulation, he was drugged. > Julie: > Er, huh? If you mean she hoped he would love her as she was, now that > he'd gotten to know her, I agree that she probably held that hope. > She still could have kept him under the love potion forever, but she > chose not to, and the only reason for that is because she knew it was > wrong. So she took the risk and did the right thing. Which doesn't > excuse doing the wrong thing first, but it does count for something, > IMO. Magpie: We assume she stopped using the love potion because it was wrong. I'm suggesting it's possible that she grew disatisfied with the "love" she knew was fake and so needed to see if she could have the real thing, and maybe thought she could have the real thing. That's not the same thing. > Julie: Tom perhaps had no legal > responsibility to do so, given that the marriage and the child's > conception were founded on deceit, but morally it would have been the > right thing to do. Magpie: Yes, morally it would have been right for him to provide for the child. Morally it would also have been right for her to care for the child. Neither of them seemed to care much about the child. -m From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 20:48:47 2006 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:48:47 -0000 Subject: Possible Flint in HBP re the Invisibility Cloak? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152320 > Randy: > HMMMMMM...Unless of course, the Dumbledore at the end of the book is > not the same Dumbledore that told Harry to always carry the cloak > with him at the beginning of the book? What if the polyjuice potion > or other spell that allows this character to switch places with > Dumbledore cannot properly cover up the Dark Mark on this person's > arm? > So Dumbledore curses his arm to prevent any sign of this mark to > appear when the two switch identities. And Dumbledore sneaks off as > Snape at the end of book six... zanooda: This seems to be a very popular idea, and believe me, I would be happy if it turned out to be true (although I'm pretty sure that DD is dead). However, your particular argument doesn't work, because DEs have the Dark Mark sign on their LEFT forearms and DD's RIGHT hand is burned. Sorry to disappoint you. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 21:20:51 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 21:20:51 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > We can not protect > children from nasty, mean spirited people. They are everywhere. We > all know them. If you try to rid the world of them you will burn > yourself out and have no energy to go after the real criminals. > Nasty people are just there. They are not pleasant. They will not > get golden crowns in heaven, but they are not criminals either. We > just have to learn to cope with them and not allow them to get to > us. That is hard, but it may well be an important lesson for Harry > in his fight against LV. > And once again we are back to manipulative Dumbledore who allows Snape to be nasty and abusive as a way of training Harry. And once again I have to say that such would be, IMO, utterly reprehensible. And yes, I think Snape DOES cross the line from nastiness into outright malice and abuse of Harry. And yes, I think Dumbledore, if he is a very wise man and the epitome of goodness, SHOULD have stepped in very firmly and put a screeching halt to Snape's behavior and malicious harrassment of Harry. And yes, if these issues are not directly dealt with, I will hold that JKR HAS failed reprehensibly, in portraying the abuse of children as a good and noble thing -- after all, the very wise epitome of goodness finds it worthwhile, doesn't he? Lupinlore From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 22:08:22 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 22:08:22 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152322 Betsy Hp: I'm having a hard time figuring out where to jump in here, so I'll just jump in. First, regarding love potions in general: When they first get introduced in GoF with Molly, Ginny and Hermione giggling over them in the background, I assumed that love potions didn't really work. That maybe they gave the drinker a slight buzz or maybe lowered inhibitions a tad, but that if the drinker didn't feel any attraction to the person giving the potion, no false feelings would arise. IOWs, I thought love potions were harmless fun. In HBP, JKR proved that assumption to be 100% wrong. Actually, I don't think JKR could have made it clearer that love potions are actually rape drugs. Love potions are used twice in canon, and once in what I'll call "canon-lite". And every, single time they completely eclipse the drinker's will and make the man (and it is a man in each case) the literal slave of the person doing the dosing. The interesting thing (to me anyway) is that this plays true to the old folk tales and fairy tales and the old-wives tales about witches stealing away virtuous and handsome young men to use towards their own twisted ends. (IIRC, weren't wet dreams blamed on witches sending succubi to torment otherwise good Christian boys?) > >>Carol: > First, I'm very curious as to whether any *male* list members would > classify what happened to Tom Sr. as "rape." > Betsy Hp: Obviously I'm not male , but I can't see how you could call what happened to Tom Sr. as anything *but* rape. Of a particularly vicious and cruel kind where he was made to feel grateful to his rapist for raping him. No wonder he returns to his parents so completely broken. (Was he even able to serve during WWII? There's no mention of his doing so.) And if Tom's broken state isn't enough to convince, we've got the "canon-lite" example of the Witch and the Muggle, from JKR's WOMBAT test: "Witch F fed love potion to a Muggle man, who has married her. When you went around with a wedding gift you discovered that she is using him as an occasional table." I got the sense that some folks thought she'd transfigured him into a table. I always presumed that the man was so besotted, *because* of the potion, that he "willing" assumed the postition of a table and stayed there. Which, IMO, paints a very disturbing picture of complete and total mental dominance. There's a *reason* Dumbledore can't tell the difference between a victim of Imperius and a victim of Love Potions. The *only* reason I can possibly think of for love potions not being labled as dark is that witches and wizards have a natural sort of immunity to them. That they're all like Harry with Imperius. Unless, as in Ron's case, the potion becomes too potent. And it's been made more than clear, IMO, that the entire WW considers muggles a lesser species. Of course, I realize that there is a belief that rape must be penetrative to be considered rape. And while a man *can* be penetrated, and therefore raped, by another man, it's a bit harder (though not impossible) for a woman to penetrate a man. And in the case of Tom and Merope, he must have done at least some of the penetrating for a baby to be the result. But, as I've said before, a man can be made to have an erection with out actually wanting one. Men who rape younger boys will defend themselves by saying that the boy was physically excited too. The idea that a love potion can induce Ron to physically attack Harry (*totally* out of character for Ron) but couldn't possibly induce him to feel physcially attracted towards someone he'd normally find repulsive is strange to me. As is the idea that a man can be induced to play the part of a table, but cannot be induced to render sexual services if asked. > >>Carol: > > > > If Tom were merely the victim of unwanted sex with a girl he was > > repulsed by, he could have gotten over it just as men get over > > having sex with girls they don't know after having had too many > > drinks, or encounters with prostitutes that they later regret > > but don't spend their lives reliving and repenting. Men don't > > make a big deal about losing their virginity or undesirable sex > > partners unless there are other consequences like venereal > > disease or the woman's pregnancy. > > Betsy Hp: You're completely and totally wrong about this, Carol. Rape is rape is rape. Male or female, a victim of rape *is* effected. Just look at some of the testimony at the "Priest trials" here in the United States. Those young men were effected for a very long time after they were raped. Just look at the "teacher trials" going on now. And we have absolutely no clue as to Tom's sexual experience before he was taken prisoner by Merope. For all we know he *was* a virgin. We know he was a young man (19?), and we only have evidence of one female friend. We also know that he was a product of 1930's England, where sex education was probably pretty backwords. And of course, he didn't believe in witches. Tom was violated in a way he'd never dreamed possible. Honestly, what if it had been Morfin (who did break into Tom's bedroom at least once) who'd whisked Tom away to have his way with him? Would you still consider Tom a willing partner to his rape? > >>Carol: > Once he got over the initial outrage and humiliation, he should > have seen that she, a lifelong victim of abuse, only wanted to be > loved, that she was sorry for her mistake, that as a fellow human > being, she deserved to be treated with compassion even though > she had hurt him. > Betsy Hp: Great. Only, *Tom never got over it*! He was a recluse from the time he stumbled back to his parents to the moment he was murdered with them. Tom was completely and totally broken by Merope. He didn't have the ability or the chance to forgive her treatment of him. > >>Carol: > > He lost his marital prospects; she was condemned, along with her > unborn child, to a life of misery. > Betsy Hp: No, Tom lost his mind. And Merope *chose* to suffer. Honestly, I think she was so horrified by what she had become (something worse than her father) that she made a decision to die. Merope was a witch, remember. She wasn't a helpless little thing as proven by her enslavement of Tom in the first place. The power was Merope to use or abuse. Tom was the helpless little thing in this story. > >>Alla: > I cannot imagine a worst punishment for rape victim that staring > in the face of the child conceived under such circumstances. Betsy Hp: I totally agree. That's why rape kits come with "morning after" pills. (At least as per "Law and Order" .) That's why pro-life supporters make an exception for rape cases. > >>Pippin: > > Till death us do part. Marriage was pretty much an unbreakable vow > in those days. > Betsy Hp: No, it wasn't. This was the 1930's, after all. And most legal contracts require that those entering into the contract be of sound mind. Tom was not. > >>Pippin: > > By the laws and customs of that era, Tom owed Merope support as > > long as she was faithful to him, and I don't think anyone has > > suggested that she wasn't. Betsy Hp: But she was a witch who had willfully and with foul purpose entranced him. I doubt the laws of that era covered it (though it wouldn't surprise me if there were some old laws still on the books) but I'm betting that the marriage would have been considered void and her life forfeit if that fact had come out and been believed. Betsy Hp From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 16 22:10:35 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 18:10:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Merope, have we seen the last of her? Message-ID: <20060516221035.67618.qmail@web37210.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152323 Hi all! It occured to me today, while doing some mundane household chores and wishing "scourgify" actually existed, that Merope might actually be a ghost. We know she was very unhappy when she died (obviously), and JKR has said that happy people do not become ghosts. I don't think it would add anything to the plot of book 7, but I just wondered if she might still be around....somewhere.... and if we might see her again. Catherine --------------------------------- Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue May 16 22:19:53 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 22:19:53 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152324 > Alla: > > Why is that? He was forced to sleep with somebody who he would not > sleep with while in his right mind. How is it not rape? Would you say > that if woman would drank a day rape drug in her drink and forced to > sleep with someone, it is not rape too? > Pippin: A person who takes a date rape drug loses all control over their actions. But the action of a love potion is specifically *not* the Imperius curse. Dumbledore takes pains to distinguish between them. There is nothing in canon to say that if Romilda told Lovepotion!Ron to jump off a cliff he would do it. A love potion would make Tom want to sleep with or marry Merope-- but it wouldn't give him no choice in the matter. I mean, he could want to sleep with her or marry her and not do it. He could take a long sea voyage or a short cold shower. Someone who's taken a date rape drug loses all their inhibitions -- there's no canon that a love potion has that effect. My knowledge of pre WWII marriage customs mostly comes from Agatha Christie novels and I could be wrong, but AFAIK even in the early 20th century it was not very easy to get a divorce. According to Wikipedia, a man could not receive a divorce on grounds other than adultery in England until 1969. Many modern jurisdictions allow annulment if it can be proved that one of the parties was mentally incompetent at the time of the marriage for example as a result of drugs or alcohol. I am not sure what the law in England is or was in the 1920's but unless and until the marriage was legally annulled Tom would be obliged to support his wife and child. Claiming that he was hoodwinked would not be enough -- he would have had to *prove* it. In any case he would be responsible for supporting the child -- annulment does not make a child illegitimate. If Merope had used makeup or skillful dressmaking instead of a love potion to hide her defects and make herself more attractive than she was without them, the law would not excuse Tom from his duties to his wife or child. After all, she would one day grow old and lose her looks, or she, like Bill, could have lost them in an accident. Pippin From juli17 at aol.com Tue May 16 22:24:04 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 22:24:04 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152325 > > Julie: > Just as a woman would be > > justifiably angry at being tricked into believing a man loved her, > I > > think Tom is justifiably angry at being tricked into believing he > > loved Merope. But I still don't see it as rape. > > Magpie: > Whether or not we call it rape, Tom was not tricked into believing > he loved Merope. He was forced to feel love for Merope through > drugs. It crosses the line from manipulation to physically > interfering with another person's will, violating their self. That, > I think, is why many readers connect it to rape, not simply because > of the sexual aspect but because it turns a person into an object > for another person. The Imperius curse too can be described as > tricking a person into believing they want to do something, but > it's actually taking over the person's will. Julie: You make a good point (as does Alla). I agree that Tom did lose his free will. In a sense it is emotional rape. I'm actually surprised love potions aren't totally banned in the WW, and most certainly at Hogwarts, as they really aren't any different than the Imperius curse. > > > > > Julie: > > Er, huh? If you mean she hoped he would love her as she was, now > that > > he'd gotten to know her, I agree that she probably held that hope. > > She still could have kept him under the love potion forever, but > she > > chose not to, and the only reason for that is because she knew it > was > > wrong. So she took the risk and did the right thing. Which doesn't > > excuse doing the wrong thing first, but it does count for > something, > > IMO. > > Magpie: > We assume she stopped using the love potion because it was wrong. > I'm suggesting it's possible that she grew disatisfied with > the "love" she knew was fake and so needed to see if she could have > the real thing, and maybe thought she could have the real thing. > That's not the same thing. Julie: I suspect it could have been a little of both. She wanted him to actually love HER. I'm not sure Merope really entertained the concept of right or wrong (she certainly hadn't been introduced to the concept in her upbringing), rather she was simply motivated by a desperate need for someone to show her affection. > > > Julie: > Tom perhaps had no legal > > responsibility to do so, given that the marriage and the child's > > conception were founded on deceit, but morally it would have been > the > > right thing to do. > > Magpie: > Yes, morally it would have been right for him to provide for the > child. Morally it would also have been right for her to care for > the child. Neither of them seemed to care much about the child. > > -m Julie: Agreed. Merope was victimized by her family and upbringing, she in turn victimized Tom, and they both victimized their child. Even though Merope certainly bears the greater responsibility for the tragedy of all three lives, I feel equal sympathy for her. Being raised in abject misery, without experiencing a single ounce of affection or decency, I'm not sure Merope could have turned out any differently. Julie From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Tue May 16 22:33:14 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 22:33:14 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152326 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote:> > > And yes, if these issues are not directly dealt with, I will hold that JKR HAS failed reprehensibly, in portraying the abuse of children as a good and noble thing -- after all, the very wise epitome of goodness finds it worthwhile, doesn't he? Steven1965aaa: I don't think it would necessarily mean that DD finds it "worthwhile". He may view it as a necessary evil. Assuming that Snape's treatment of Harry and Neville is a reflection of Snape's true personality (which I think it is), and taking into account that DD needs Snape, Snape has tremendous value to DD, and DD is asking him to risk his life as a double agent (whether you look at Snape as ESE, OFH, DDM or whatever, from DD's point of view he's asking Snape to risk his life as a double agent), SS may feel that he can only ask Snape for so much. In other words DD has to "pick his battles" with Snape, and asking Snape to alter his personality for the students' comfort is not a priority as compared with the other things DD is asking Snape to do (again this is from DD's point of view so it doesn't matter whether he's really DDM or ESE). From midnightowl6 at hotmail.com Tue May 16 22:48:47 2006 From: midnightowl6 at hotmail.com (P J) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 18:48:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152327 Snipping most of Alla's post since I agree so strongly with her and don't want to keep repeating "I agree" or "me too".... > Carol responds: > First, I'm very curious as to whether any *male* list members would > classify what happened to Tom Sr. as "rape." IMO, it's more like > seduction and entrapment into marriage (admittedly not justifiable or > moral actions), and it's his inability to marry the woman of his > choice that upsets him and causes him to be a recluse in his parents' > house. PJ: Morfin has already brought the MoM to his door by hexing Tom Sr. and then Morfin's sister traps him into marriage with a very strong love potion. I think it's just as reasonable, maybe more so, to assume that he's hiding out in his parent's home so that those insane wizarding folk can't do him any more physical or emotional damage, After all, having said no to a witch could result in his death for all he knows. Carol: > If Tom were merely the victim of unwanted sex with a girl he was > repulsed by, he could have gotten over it just as men get over having > sex with girls they don't know after having had too many drinks, or > encounters with prostitutes that they later regret but don't spend > their lives reliving and repenting. Men don't make a big deal about > losing their virginity or undesirable sex partners unless there are > other consequences like venereal disease or the woman's pregnancy. > IMO, it wasn't the sex so much as the marriage that in his view ruined > his life. This wasn't just any ordinary girl, it wasn't excess alcohol that caused the problem and it wasn't any old family ... it was a witch belonging to a family he's already suffered injury at the hand of more than once. Somehow I think that would be a little harder to "get over" than normal. Some men may not consider what happened to Tom rape, some might. Every person has their own outlook on it, men included. Regardless, she took away his free will and imposed her own on him for months at a time until he finally fathered her child. If Tom were instead called Tina we would, by this definition alone, call it what it is -- rape and assault. There should be no double standard. Carol: > Once he got over the initial outrage and humiliation, >he should have seen that she, a lifelong victim of abuse, only >wanted to be loved, that she was sorry for her mistake, that as a fellow >human being, she deserved to be treated with compassion even though >she had hurt him. Does being sorry and trying to make amends for a >mistake count for nothing? >Alla: >Mistake? Trap another human being in her bed is a mistake? In my book >it is a crime, a horrendous crime. >And no, being sorry for rape does not count for much, although I >don't remember her saying that she is sorry either. PJ: I don't remember her saying she was sorry either, only that she had hoped he'd been with her long enough to come to actually love her and, if not, at least feel something for the child they created. Not much of an apology... more like manipulation. And I'm curious to know how Tom was supposed to know she had been abused all her life and only wanted to feel loved for the first time in her life. They didn't mingle in the village and all we hear him say about them is that they were odd. All she says about him is that he'd treated her kindly. She repaid that kindness by drugging him, binding him to her through a marriage he was not able to give true consent to and then presenting him with the prospect of a child. You feel sorry for her? Carol: >He, however, did not forgive her or relent in his cold, >cruel punishment of her transgression. He blamed her, abandoned her >and their child, and went off to live with his parents, not providing >her with a penny. He did what was easy, not what was right. Alla: >I cannot imagine a worst punishment for rape victim that staring in >the face of the child conceived under such circumstances PJ: I don't see him running off as punishing Merope, I see it as him getting as far away from her and her entire family as he could get and then huddling in the house for the rest of his life. That is *fear*, not punishment. Even after he got away he was effectively a prisoner of the WW because of that fear. Things didn't improve for him just because she stopped giving him the potion. She didn't just sleep with him and let him go, she took everything away from him, and then, 16 years later, their son finished the job by taking his physcial existence as well as that of his parents. How can he not be seen as a victim? >Carol: >He had a moral obligation to care for his >child regardless of the circumstances of its conception. And his >injuries did not justify deliberate cruelty and neglect toward someone >who had asked his forgiveness. Alla: Not in my book. In my book he suffered enough without being imposed on with his child and I don't remember anywhere in canon Merope asking him for forgiveness, by the way. PJ: I agree with Alla 100%. I didn't read anywhere about her asking for forgiveness. Even if somewhere off the page she did, when you ask forgiveness you take your chances. The person you wronged has no obligation to *grant* you the forgiveness you seek. I also think TomSr. had been through enough and was under no obligation to raise or provide for that child she drugged him into producing. Sorry. > Pippin: >> Till death us do part. Marriage was pretty much an unbreakable vow in > those days. > > By the laws and customs of that era, Tom owed Merope support as > long as she was faithful to him, and I don't think anyone has > suggested that she wasn't. A marriage is informed consent between two adults to create a union. Tom was drugged and could not give that consent "with a clear mind". He couldn't remarry because he was already legally wed to Merope and it's kind of hard to explain to people that your wife is a witch (most men would say MINE TOO!) and get out of the marriage but that doesn't mean he has to provide for either her or her child once he gets away... I don't blame him one bit for anything he's done. PJ From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 22:58:35 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 22:58:35 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152329 > >>Pippin: > A person who takes a date rape drug loses all control over their > actions. > But the action of a love potion is specifically *not* the Imperius > curse. Dumbledore takes pains to distinguish between them. Betsy Hp: I think you might be misremembering canon, Pippin. In HBP, Dumbledore asks Harry: "Can you not think of any measure Merope could have taken to make Tom Riddle forget his Muggle companion, and fall in love with her instead?" "The Imperius Curse?" Harry suggested. "Or a love potion?" "Very good. Personally, I'm inclined to think that she used a love potion. I am sure it would have seemed more romantic to her..." [scholastic ed. p.213] Dumbledore suggests that a love potion "seems" more romantic. That's the only distinguishing difference he points out. And it's all in the eye of the beholder. > >>Pippin: > There is nothing in canon to say that if Romilda told Lovepotion! > Ron to jump off a cliff he would do it. > Betsy Hp: Except for Dumbledore linking love potions to the Imperius curse . Also, we do see Ron exhibit *physical* changes because of the love potion. "Ron's fist was drawn right back; his face was contorted with rage..." [ibid p.393] Ron is exhibiting the physical signs of being angry. His facial expression is one of rage. Now, if Romilda had entered the room and suggested she and Ron have sex, why is it such a stretch to see that *only because of the love potion* Ron would become physically excited? > >>Pippin: > A love potion would make Tom want to sleep with or marry Merope-- > but it wouldn't give him no choice in the matter. > I mean, he could want to sleep with her or marry her and not do > it. > He could take a long sea voyage or a short cold shower. Betsy Hp: This doesn't make any sense to me. You're blaming Tom for not realizing that his desire was false? Should the muggle who became a table have realized that he didn't really want to be a table? Plus, I don't think you've backed your premise in the first place. You've yet to show any evidence that love potions *don't* take away the ability to choose. Remember, Dumbledore equates love potions with Imperius. The little boy who tried to kill his grandparents did not have the ability to decide to take a long sea voyage instead. > >>Pippin: > Someone who's taken a date rape drug loses all their inhibitions -- > there's no canon that a love potion has that effect. Betsy Hp: I would point out Ron's behavior while under the influence. I don't recall him ever being that open in his declarations of love before. > >>Pippin: > If Merope had used makeup or skillful dressmaking instead of a > love potion to hide her defects and make herself more attractive > than she was without them, the law would not excuse Tom from his > duties to his wife or child. > After all, she would one day grow old and lose her looks, or she, > like Bill, could have lost them in an accident. Betsy Hp: Right, and if Merope had used a glamour (as Magpie pointed out) then this argument would make sense. Instead, she took Tom's will away from him and made him her slave. He did what Merope wanted when she wanted it, and he was made to feel that he was enjoying every second of it. After that sort of treatment, why should he believe anything Merope had to tell him? Why should he take her word that the child is his? Or that there even *is* a child? And why would he conclude that *Merope* was the helpless one needing *his* help? And why would he not expect any child of Merope's to not be a complete and total monster, just like their mom? Betsy Hp From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue May 16 23:06:59 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 23:06:59 -0000 Subject: The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. (Was: Snogging and Love Potions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152330 Potioncat: So if something like Confundus is not dark, I'm not sure why love potions should be. Although I would think the way Merope used it should be illegal, just like stabbing someone with a pencil would be illegal. Well this tennis match has been fun, but we aren't getting anywhere and no one else seems to want to join in. (Unless I've missed a post.) a_svirn: At risk of being a tedious bore I'd like to try again. Your analogy with stabbing one with a pencil brings back the issue of using and *mis*using basically innocent things. But you yourself say that love potions (unlike pencils) aren't innocent. Or at least you did say that they are not good. Therefore, it is not the question of misusing. They can only be *used* for some wicked purpose or none at all. Whether such purpose can be classified as *dark* I have no idea, and since we don't know what *dark* is the point is moot anyway. But. About innocence. I simply cannot square your description of "normal" potions' effects with everything we've learned of love potions so far. We know that they create powerful infatuation and obsession. Somehow the words "infatuation" and "obsession" do not conjure a picture of some innocent Yule Ball date before my mind's eye. I quite believe that such date was what Romilda had in mind in the first place. I doubt very much that the result would have been the one she'd imagined, however. A powerfully infatuated hormonal sixteen year old boy wouldn't settle for chaste kisses even in the best of times. With all inhibitions and restraints he might have otherwise exercised "magically" removed he would have wanted much more than kisses. And Romilda (who in her innocence would have probably given him every encouragement) would have got much more than she bargained for. I do hope Fred and George provide contraceptive potions along with other WonderWitch products. Also I don't think that what Merope did was all that different from Romilda's intention. Do you really believe that Merope schemed to trap Tom into a forced marriage from the start? Somehow the "defeated creature" from that Ogden's memory does not strike me as a designing jade. I quite believe that she wanted the same thing that Romilda did: so that he would notice her, ask her out, take her for a ride, share a kiss And one thing led to another. Carol: It might be different if a boy used a love potion on a girl, and certainly if he wanted something more than "snogging" from an otherwise unwilling girl it would be reprehensible. (Sorry, Lupinlore. Your favorite word is the one that came to mind.) There's a reason why girls can enter the boys' dormitories but boys can't enter the girls' dorms, as Ron finds out when he tries to run up the girls' stairs. But these are children's books, and JKR's very young girls aren't seducing boys, nor are they in any danger of getting themselves pregnant, as JKR has made clear in an interview. a_svirn: Frankly, I don't remember the interview in question, but I don't agree that it is all that different with for a boy to use a potion on a girl. The rule concerning dormitories is quite ridiculous and reflects a rather misguided Victorian-like attitude towards the issue of female sexuality. Teenage female sexuality I might add. If anything is glaringly clear in the books is that this rule as well as this attitude is a mistake. It is females of the species that act as sexual predators within and outside Hogwarts. Carol: If Tom were merely the victim of unwanted sex with a girl he was repulsed by, he could have gotten over it just as men get over having sex with girls they don't know after having had too many drinks, or encounters with prostitutes that they later regret but don't spend their lives reliving and repenting. Men don't make a big deal about losing their virginity or undesirable sex partners unless there are other consequences like venereal disease or the woman's pregnancy. a_svirn: Women can "get over" random sexual encounters too. Some of them, anyway. Some don't even have to "get over" anything and see in them nothing to repent or regret. Still it's not the same thing as rape. There is a bit of a difference between casual sex and forced intercourse. I agree with you that for Tom a forced marriage to the likes of Merope was nothing short of disastrous. But it doesn't make his forced intimacy with her any less damaging. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 23:19:22 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 23:19:22 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152331 Gerry wrote: > So he finds out he has been sleeping with somebody he finds totally > repellent and it is not rape? I think it is rape, I think he panicked and felt violated and besmirched when he found out what had happened to him. I can easily imagine him running out as fast as he could without looking back - ever. > > > > Carol earlier: > > > Once he got over the initial outrage and humiliation, he should have seen that she, a lifelong victim of abuse, only wanted to be loved, that she was sorry for her mistake, that as a fellow human being, she deserved to be treated with compassion even though she had hurt him. Does being sorry and trying to make amends for a mistake count for nothing? > Gerry: > You assume he knew anything about her background. You assume he actually understood in what kind of psychological environment she grew up. Carol: He knew exactly what kind of home she lived in, that she was motherless, her father was a "tramp," and her brother was a mental case about whom the villagers told stories. He would have seen her in her rags with her dull hair and wall eyes and plin, sad face. It wouldn't take much to gues what kind of life she lived. Gerry: You also assume that he could see she only wanted love. It is equally possible that she never talked about her past, that he knew nothing about her and that when the effects of the potions were gone he saw this ugly, dumb, nasty witch who had enchanted him and tricked him into marriage. And even if he understood all that he was in no way obliged to have anything to do with her again. She was a victim, sure, but why would it have been her victim's duty to help her? After all, > she was a witch and could be supposed to look after herself. Carol responds: And because she was an "ugly, dumb, nasty witch," she had no right to be treated with human dignity? Almost certainly when she told him that she was a witch and that she had given him a love potion, she would have told him why she did it--because she "loved" him and wanted to be loved in return. And she was the mother of his child and ought to have been given the provision that any decent man who could afford to do so would give to a woman he didn't love but had impregnated. You are arguing for inhumanity and revenge. I'm arguing for understanding and forgiveness. You may be right that he thought that she could fend for herself because she was a witch, but I would think the fact that magic did not guarantee decent living conditions would have been clear from the conditions in which the Gaunts lived and from her own obvious lack of social skills and education. He must have known that he was condemning them both to poverty and perhaps starvation, and yes, it was his duty, as the child's father and the girl's husband (tricked into marriage or not) to provide for them. The only part of his marriage vows that he kept was to "forsake all others," giving up the woman he would have preferred to marry. And that, IMO, is the chief cause of his suffering, which is not nearly as great as hers. > > > Julie: Yes, she was wrong to do it, but her intent wasn't to harm, so I can both condemn her action while not fully condemning her. But that's just me :-) > Gerry: > I totally agree with that, but I don't agree it is Tom who should give the compassion, the forgiveness or the love. Carol: You agree that she had no intent to harm, yet you think she's a rapist? You condemn her action but not her, yet you don't think that Tom should forgive her? What about us, the readers? Maybe we should forgive her? To return to the "rape" idea, please find me some evidence that anyone in the book considers Tom Sr.to be the victim of rape. Dumbledore certainly doesn't, nor does Harry. Nor does Tom Sr. himself claim anything of the sort. He says that he was "hoodwinked," meaning, according to Dumbledore, tricked nto marrying a girl he didn't and couldn't love. (Obviously he can't claim to other Muggles that he was given a love potion or literally bewitched. He'd be laughed out of town, as would a man of his generation who claimed to be raped. (Seduced, maybe. Raped? Physically impossible, people of that era would claim.) We need to consider that the Merope incident took place in the 1930s, not the politically correct 1990s or 2000s. Setting aside the act of forcible homosexual rape, which they might concede to be abhorrent and capable of causing a male victim lasting emotional trauma, the idea that a man could be raped simply would not occur to a man of Tom's generation. His problem, as far as we can see, is not that he was sexually used but that he can't marry his darling Cecilia. Nor do we have any evidence that he and Merope had sex "on a daily basis," as Alla claims. We know that they had it once, or Tom Jr. could not have been conceived. That's all we know. And when he did have it, it was consensual sex with his lawfully wedded wife, or so he would have seen it at the time. Merope was not standing over him with a wand or a gun forcing him to have sex. As for being permanently tramatized, he returned to live with his parents and never married. Where is the evidence of emotional trauma? Anger, humiliation, resentment, absolutely, or he would not have deserted Merope. That and the mere fact of her appearance, her background, her family, her poverty, her ignorance, her utter unsuitability as a wife, combined with the fact that she was actually a witch, would be sufficient in themselves to account for those emotions. We don't need to bring in matters like male sexual trauma for which there is not a shred of evidence in canon. I think that some readers are perhaps bringing their own social or political agenda to this discussion rather than looking at the canonical evidence. What we know, in short, is that she tricked him into marrying her, probably with a love potion, that she became pregnant (which requires only a single act of sex--and I doubt that Merope knew anything about contraception whether she wanted to get pregnant or not), that she stopped giving him the potion, that he left her, that he angrily blamed her for "hoodwinking" him and abandoned her, leaving her alone and desperate and pregnant, without a penny to support herself or her child. Is child abandonment not a crime? Is it not a father's legal and moral responsibility to provide child support, especially if he is rich and the mother is poor, whether or not he is himself a victim? Surely her plight was worse than his? I like to think, BTW, that when he was at last confronted with the son who looked so much like him, the son whom he had helped to turn into a monster by abandoning him and his mother, that Tom Sr. at last repented his misdeed and spent his last moments trying to protect his parents from becoming victims of that son along with himself. I will probably be proven wrong, but the memory in the cave could very well be Tom Sr.'s: "It's all my fault, all my fault,' he sobbed. 'Please make it stop [the pain of a Crucio?]? I know I did wrong . . . . Don't hurt them, don't hurt them, please, please, it's my fault, hurt me instead . . . ." (HBP Am. ed. 572). If those were Tom's last words, I forgive him his trespasses, terrible as the consequences were for Merope, Tom Jr., and in part for the WW itself. Now let's look at Merope. When do we ever see her behaving assertively or even lusting for Tom Sr.? She likes to look at him, but nothing worse than that as far as we see. And no doubt she fantasizes about him, Cinderella fantasies in which the handsome, rich young man from the mansion on the hill (it must seem like a palace compared with the hovel she lives in) rides away with her and they live happily ever after. Sorry; I'm falling into speculation here. Back to canon. She lives in a hovel (darling Cecilia calls it "an eyesore") containing a "filthy armchair," a "grimy black stove," a smoking fire, "squalid-looking pots and pans," and not much else, with a brother who's at least half-mad, attacking Muggles and nailing snakes to the door if they aren't "nice" to him, and a father who abuses her, not only calling her a "disgusting little Squib," "a pointless lump," and "a useless sack of muck" in the space of about five minutes, but seizing the locket around her neck and almost choking her (it's clearly far more important to him than she is). Probably he abuses her physically in other ways off page; she's clearly afraid of him, dropping the pot when he yells at her, unable to perform magic in his presence. Her hands tremble as she puts the pot back on the shelf. She wears "a ragged gray dress the exact color of the dirty stone wall behind her," her hair is "lank and dull," she has a plain, pale, heavy face and eyes that stare in opposite directions like Morfin's. Harry thinks he's "never seen a more defeated-looking person." She does not speak a single word during the entire scene." And this is the young woman we're supposed to consider a rapist, a girl who has apparently never known love and seldom heard a kind word (Ogden's may be the first and last, aside from any endearments whispered by her husband when he's under enchantment). Her dead mother, almost certainly a Gaunt herself because the Gaunts marry their cousins, may not have loved her, either. Certainly she's unloved now, with as much chance of escaping her abusive life by marrying the handsome Muggle as Morfin has of becoming Minister for Magic. Only when both Morfin and Marvolo are in prison does she have a taste of freedom and the chance to go after what she wants. That she does so in a way that hurts the object of her love probably does not at first occur to her. She has not received any training in morality or ethics, only abuse and name-calling. There is no evidence that either she or her brother ever attended Hogwarts or had any education of any sort. Later, in London and nine months pregnant, she is taken advantage of by Caractacus Burke, who could have ended her poverty but instead give her ten Galleons for a priceless locket, and she is too naive and ignorant to know the difference. (I'm not sure how she learned to concoct a potion of any knd, BTW; there's no evidence that she or her father or brother can even read. Marvolo sends the Ministry owl away. Surely he would have read the letter if he could. And her father holds no job, seeming to think that this blood heritage is all he needs. Harry pities her, though he does think that she should have saved her life by magic for her son's sake. (What that would have accomplished, given her poverty and helplessness, I can't guess. You can't conjure money or food with a wand, not real money or real nutrients, at least, or people like Remus Lupin wouldn't live in poverty.) Dumbledore also pities her and points out that she never had Lily's courage. Nowhere does anyone condemn her for wanting to be loved and going about it in the wrong way. He does, however, note that Tom Sr. abandoned her. In fact, the only two people who condemn her are Morfin and Marvolo, first for loving a Muggle and then for running off with the locket. Speculating again, I would guess, given Merope's timidity and lack of courage, that she waited, depending on the potion to act for her, for Tom Sr. to make all the moves--to propose, to make love to her on their wedding night, to kiss her and tell her she was beautiful. Had she really been beautiful, he might have had a fling with her, but he certainly would not have married her of her own free will. A mesalliance with the daughter of a "tramp" and the sister of a madman would have been unthinkable. But Merope, defeated and homely as she was, could not hope even for that, and so she resorted to the only means at her disposal for finding and receiving love, a love potion. Perhaps she realized at last that it was an infatuation potion, that he didn't truly love her, and she set him free. Her repayment was hatred, rejection, and abandonment, including the burden of bearing her child alone, with no way to feed, clothe or house either him or herself. Frankly, I'm surprised that she lived long enough to give birth to him. No one should have to suffer such a fate, no matter what their sins. Carol, who can't understand why readers are ready to forgive Draco for trying to murder Dumbledore and nearly killing two schoolmates through his carelessness but not to forgive Merope, who is not much older, for trying to find love in the wrong way From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 17 00:02:56 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 00:02:56 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152332 > Betsy Hp: > I think you might be misremembering canon, Pippin. In HBP, > Dumbledore asks Harry: > > "Can you not think of any measure Merope could have taken to make > Tom Riddle forget his Muggle companion, and fall in love with her > instead?" > "The Imperius Curse?" Harry suggested. "Or a love potion?" > "Very good. Personally, I'm inclined to think that she used a love > potion. I am sure it would have seemed more romantic to her..." > [scholastic ed. p.213] > > Dumbledore suggests that a love potion "seems" more romantic. > That's the only distinguishing difference he points out. And it's > all in the eye of the beholder. Pippin: But canon has already told us they are different in the ways they work. Even amortentia "will simply cause a powerful infatuation or obsession." Now as Slughorn proceeds to point out, that is a dangerous state to be in, and Harry is right to fear later that Ron might do something serious. But that's comparable to Molly's fear that Bill and Fleur, under the pressure of wartime, might be mistaking their feelings for one another and rushing into marriage. If they had done so, even if Fleur had secretly used her veela powers to attract Bill and then stopped, they would still have a lawful marriage, I think. No matter how you become obsessed, it's not wise to marry on an obsession. Even in the grip of Romilda's potion, Ron only says that he *thinks* he's in love with her -- and as the old saw has it, if you're not sure it's love, it's not love. The potion caused Ron to feel obsessed -- it didn't cause him to be certain his feeling was real love. If he had married or slept with Romilda before he was certain that he was really in love with her, or if he mistook his feelings of passion for real love, then human folly would have been to blame, not magic. I am inclined to think that if Tom forgot his old sweetheart, he probably wasn't in love with her either. Betsy HP> > "Ron's fist was drawn right back; his face was contorted with > rage..." [ibid p.393] > > Ron is exhibiting the physical signs of being angry. His facial > expression is one of rage. Now, if Romilda had entered the room and > suggested she and Ron have sex, why is it such a stretch to see that > *only because of the love potion* Ron would become physically > excited? Pippin: Right, and when he's physically excited, is he then compelled to jump the bones of the person responsible? Even if he's crazy about her and she's willing? No, he still has a choice. > Betsy Hp: > This doesn't make any sense to me. You're blaming Tom for not > realizing that his desire was false? Should the muggle who became a > table have realized that he didn't really want to be a table? Pippin: He should have been able to tell that he was obsessed, not really in love, yes. I should mention that I was more under the impression that the witch had transfigured him into a table because she had grown bored with him. Pippin From gav_fiji at yahoo.com Wed May 17 00:55:01 2006 From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 00:55:01 -0000 Subject: Why Lily could have saved herself Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152333 This theory really falls somewhere between the history of magic and the future of the books. I am firmly of the view that JKR would not have placed as much emphasis as she has on Lily's gifts as a potioneer unless they were to play an important role in book 7. It is a part of the history of the wizarding world that Lily is deceased, but it has also been declared, by Voldemort himself, that Lily needn't have died. There is a plausible explanation for this, which runs something like this: Harry discovers that the reason Lily might have been spared was that she had discovered some powerful potion that no one (apart from perhaps Snape) is aware of and which has qualities that would finish off the evil that men do or strip a wizard of his powers perhaps. Only she was capable of making it thus explaining why Voldemort was prepared to spare her life, but she refused to co-operate, as we know, and was, therefore, killed. The secret potion then went with her to her grave. Any other plausible explanations out there? Goddlefrood From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 01:07:08 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 01:07:08 -0000 Subject: Scar Speculation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152334 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" > wrote: > > > JPK has stated in an interview that, as things stand, > > the last word of the final Book will be "scar". Given > > this information has anyone speculated, or does anyone > > now want to speculate, what the last SENTENCE will be? > > houyhnhnm: > > This is an optimistic speculation. I will leave the pessimistic ones > to someone else: > > Harry gazed at his reflection for a long time, wondering if he would > ever get used to the sight of his face without the scar. > Angie here: I soooo want it to be something like houyhnhnm suggested, but I wonder: how does that square with DD's remark to McGonagall in SS that, "He'll have that scar forever (softcover U.S. edition at 15). I think I've seen in other posts that JKR has said that DD often speaks for her or words to that effect. So, I don't think DD was speaking metaphorically. From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 23:59:48 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 16:59:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060516235948.24376.qmail@web61321.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152335 Carol, who can't understand why readers are ready to forgive Draco for trying to murder Dumbledore and nearly killing two schoolmates through his carelessness but not to forgive Merope, who is not much older, for trying to find love in the wrong way Joe: I am among those who often wonder how Draco gets such a pass. I also feel very badly for Merope. That said, if we were talking about a man slipping something into the food or drink of a woman like does happen then there would be no doubt that we would be calling it rape. If that is indeed rape then I fail to see a material difference in this case. Merope used an outside force to compell Tom Sr. to do what she desired. How can that not be rape? Certainly she is pitiable but it does not lessen what she did. Still I can forgive her much easier than Draco. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 01:18:27 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 01:18:27 -0000 Subject: Why Lily could have saved herself In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152336 > Goddlefrood wrote: > > > It is a part of the history of the wizarding world that Lily is > deceased, but it has also been declared, by Voldemort himself, that > Lily needn't have died. > > There is a plausible explanation for this, which runs something like > this: > > Harry discovers that the reason Lily might have been spared was that > she had discovered some powerful potion that no one (apart from > perhaps Snape) is aware of and which has qualities that would finish > off the evil that men do or strip a wizard of his powers perhaps. > > Only she was capable of making it thus explaining why Voldemort was > prepared to spare her life, but she refused to co-operate, as we > know, and was, therefore, killed. > > The secret potion then went with her to her grave. > > Angie here: Interesting theory, and I think you're right that we haven't heard the last of Lily's potion-making ability. But if LV wanted the potion, couldn't he have Imperiused her and forced her to make the potion? Or forced her to take Veritaserum and gotten her to tell him how to make the potion? His only option wasn't to kill her if she didn't voluntarily make the potion, was it, or am I missing something? > From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 01:38:10 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 01:38:10 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152337 Lupinlore: > And yes, if these issues are not directly dealt with, I will hold > that JKR HAS failed reprehensibly, in portraying the abuse of > children as a good and noble thing -- after all, the very wise > epitome of goodness finds it worthwhile, doesn't he? Leslie41: That's fallacious reasoning. It's a non-sequitur. It doesn't necessarily follow that if these issues aren't dealt with that DD finds the abuse of children "good and noble" and "worthwhile." For example: Remus witnessed James and Sirius tormenting Severus, and stayed friends with them. Does that mean that he thought the obvious abuse of Snape was "good and noble" and "worthwhile"? No. It bothered him. Probably quite a lot. But though he did not participate in the abuse (at least from what we know from Snape's worst memory), neither did he try to put a stop to it. Lily did that. Shall we now demand that Lupin be "punished" for not calling his friends to task for their previous torment of Snape? You can argue that DD is in a position of authority, yadda yadda yadda, and that it's not Lupin's job to make his friends accountable. But of course it is. Especially since what the Marauders do to Snape, or attempt to do, is far, far, worse than ANYTHING that Snape has ever done to his students. Snape has saved Harry's life numerous times. Black attempts to have Snape killed, and even years later is not one jot sorry. He tells Remus that "he deserved it," and never once to we see Remus contradict him or confront him on that. We forgive Lupin because he has his reasons (the extrapolation of which would take a long time here, but I think we all know what they are). By the same token, DD has his reasons (guilt, guilt, and more guilt, as to a teenaged Snape, I think). Indict DD if you will, but then you must indict Lupin as well, who does the same thing. Snape was 15 once, too. He was humiliated, and then nearly killed, and neither Lupin nor DD held Sirius and James accountable. (Certainly Black wasn't expelled, which one might expect when one student attempts to murder another.) Black even became a valued member of the Order. Or is humiliation and attempted murder okay only when the teenager involved is Severus Snape? From puduhepa98 at aol.com Wed May 17 01:43:16 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 21:43:16 EDT Subject: CHAPT DICUSS 15 The Unbreakable Vow Message-ID: <302.51ec6bb.319bd9b4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152338 > >>Carol: > CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 15, The Unbreakable Vow. > > And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along > with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star > pupil, Severus Snape? >Betsy Hp: >Because both Trelawney and Snape are Slugclub members. Trelawney, >like McLaggen and Blaise, is there because of her family (her >grandmother Cassandra, the famous seerer). Snape, like Hermione, is >there because of his abilities. > > Do you detect any genuine affection on Slughorn's part for his > brilliant former student, or is it all jovial bluster and too much > mead? Did you feel any sympathy for Snape during this conversation? > Why or why not? >Betsy Hp: >There must be some affection there or Snape wouldn't have attended >the party. Nor would he have suffered being snatched out of the >crowd. We learn at Spinner's End that Snape actually can handle >social occasions well (contrary to much fanon) so I imagine he was >even enjoying himself a little. Nikkalmati: I was puzzled about Snape's presence at the party more than Trelawney's. It doesn't seem that he is the party type at all. Especially as they were the only faculty there. Was he watching Harry? But then why wasn't he watching Draco instead? It doesn't seem to me that he and Slughorn are that close, although Slughorn should have been interested in "collecting" SS. Snape appears tolerant of being a bit manhandled here. So maybe he was in the Slug club, but Slughorn does not praise Snape as he would one of his collection. Perhaps we will see more of their relationship in Book 7. Nikkalmati > 11) What do you make of Draco's contempt for DADA, his attempt at > Occlumency, his reaction to Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and his > accusation that Snape is trying to steal his glory? >Betsy Hp: I> hear Bellatrix in just about all of Draco's statements. She's >using Draco to gain her own glory, and Draco is too young and >inexperienced to realize it. And I think he's confused because >everything he's been taught to believe is starting to come down >around his ears. Nikkalmati: I certainly see Bellatrix's hand here too. She is using Draco to improve her own position, but even more to bring Snape down a peg or two (or even get him killed). Snape assumed that with Narcissa's help he would be able to find out from Draco what he was doing and counter it (DDM assumed here). However, Bella. dear Auntie, steps in and teaches Draco Occulumency, helps him with his Hogsmead plans, talks down Snape, and convinces Draco to rely on her and cut SS out. I don't think she told LV about the Vow. It would land Narcissa in so much trouble and I think she has more family loyalty than that. If she didn't tell LV, I don't think he knows about it. JMO. Nikkalmati ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Everything you need is one click away. Make Yahoo! your home page now. _Click Here!_ (http://us.click.yahoo.com/AHchtC/4FxNAA/yQLSAA/s4wxlB/TM) --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Wondering what to do this summer? Go to Patronus 2006 (http://www.patronus.dk/2006) or, if you're already registered for Lumos (http://www.hp2006.org), meet up with other HPfGU members there! 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_R EAD Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Wed May 17 01:50:47 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 01:50:47 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152339 nethwen21: > Professor Snape is based on a teacher Ms Rowling had > and whom she hated as a pupil. I have had the feeling > all along that she does not think of her teacher in this > way now and that the major theme in her books is about > misjudgement and overcoming prejudice. houyhnhnm: Makes me think of a certain "proud disagreeable sort of man" created by Rowling's favorite author. I really don't see all that much to criticize in Snape's teaching style myself except for the favoritism, which seems to considered acceptable in his world. I had a number of "Professor Snapes" in my own academic career. I hated them all at the time, but came to appreciate how much I had learned in their classes as the years went by. The "easy" teachers I can barely remember, nor what they taught. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed May 17 01:52:27 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 01:52:27 -0000 Subject: Ginny's Behavior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152340 Ceridwen: > > Ron, as her brother, will be more critical of her than anyone else... On who Bill decides to marry, Ginny has no business butting in. Bruce: > Hold up a moment! It is OK for a brother to object to whom his sister dates, but a sister must accept whom a brother hooks up with? Ceridwen: When the sister is fifteen and the youngest, can you doubt that the elder sib will yell, scream and hollar at her behavior? And can you imagine a fifteen year old butting into your presumably adult love life? Bruce: > Surely you can't mean anything so sexist. But, if not, what DO you mean? Ceridwen: How sweet of you to chivalrously stand up for us defenseless females. We need you boys to come charging to the rescue. You are reading something into the situation that DOES NOT EXIST. Younger sib makes a spectacle of herself, elder sib objects strenuously at finding younger sib in a clinch in the middle of the shortcut to Gryffindor Tower. Ron handles it differently than the twins would have, but I'll bet that if they found him snogging in the same circumstances in his fifth year (their seventh), they would have crawled all over him like lice on scalp. Conversely, we have elder adult sibling who is (Ginny fifteen, Ron sixteen, twins eighteen, Percy twenty iirc, Charlie twenty-three, Bill twenty-five) around twenty-five years old, on his own, earning a living, dating the same girl for a year (OotP evidence, much too lazy to look up the citation), engaged to the girl he's been seeing for that year, being criticized by a snot-nosed fifteen year old sib who adores him and probably doesn't want him to marry *anybody* who will take him away from her, which pretty much means anybody at all. Can you see the difference beyond the sex of the two in question? Adults can do things kids can't. Adults can sign contracts. Adults can be tried on their own merit in a court of law. Adults must take responsibility for their actions without having Mummy and Daddy charged by implication. Adults are not kids. Adults will have the benefits as well as the responsiblities of age. Bill is an adult. Bill is engaged. Bill is his own man and not even subject to his parents' will and whim. Ginny is still a child. Her parents ultimately have to pick up her slack. Her family will be at the least shamed and looked at askance for her misdeeds. This is the way of things with children. They can't sign contracts. They can't get Apparation licenses. They can't agree to marriage on their own. Elder sibs babysit/child mind younger sibs, elder sibs remind younger sibs how to act, even if the elder sibs make exceptions for themselves unfairly. Elder sibs are held accountable by parents when the elder sib is the only one present while the younger sib is making a spectacle of herself/himself. You can choose to see it as a sexist issue if you like, but you're purposely missing everything else that goes along with being the yuongest of seven as opposed to the eldest of seven. And I would love to see your reaction to your younger sib trying to dictate your adult love life no matter what sex that sib happens to be. Ceridwen. From celizwh at intergate.com Wed May 17 02:34:53 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 02:34:53 -0000 Subject: CHAPT DICUSS 15 The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: <302.51ec6bb.319bd9b4@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152341 Betsy Hp: > > Because both Trelawney and Snape are Slugclub > > members. Trelawney, like McLaggen and Blaise, is > > there because of her family (her grandmother > > Cassandra, the famous seerer). houyhnhnm: Actually, Cassandra was Sybill's great-great-grandmother. If she is still alive (and she could be in a world where some people live to be 150+), then I take your point. Otherwise I doubt merely having a famous relative would earn her a place in Slughorn' inner circle. It appears to me that famous relatives are only a ticket in if they are potentially useful to Horace. Look how fast he drops Marcus Belby. And while Draco may use his grandfather's name to save face after being dragged into Slughorn's party by the ear, the relationship didn't get him an invite. Nikkalmati: > I was puzzled about Snape's presence at the party > more than Trelawney's. It doesn't seem that he is the > party type at all. Especially as they were the only > faculty there. Was he watching Harry? But then why > wasn't he watching Draco instead? houyhnhnm: I have been wondering if he was there in his capacity as Dumbledore's hound, to watch (out for) Trelawney. Her presence at the party is still not adequately explained, IMO. There appear to be quite a few guests from outside of Hogwarts: Sanguini (love it), the elderly warlocks deep in conversation under a cloud a pipe smoke. The party posed a potential security risk, it seems to me. Trelawney could have been in danger. Now that I think of it, Snape may *have* been there to keep an eye on Harry, for the same reason. And there may have been some shady characters at the party of interest to the Order. I guess all of the above could have contributed to the reason for Snape's being at the party, along with the fact that, as Slytherin HOH, an invitation from the former Slytherin HOH was not an obligation Snape could slither out of. Nikkalmati: > It doesn't seem to me that he and Slughorn are that > close, although Slughorn should have been interested > in "collecting" SS. Snape appears tolerant of being > a bit manhandled here. So maybe he was in the Slug > club, but Slughorn does not praise Snape as he would > one of his collection. houyhnhnm: His two "even Severus" remarks at the party amount to pretty high praise indirectly, but I, too, was struck by the fact that in all Slughorn's reminiscing about the good old days, and along with all his praise of Lily, I can't remember his ever mentioning Snape. From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Tue May 16 23:19:32 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 16:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ginny/brothers/not old fashioned but old predjuces In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060516231932.48104.qmail@web61313.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152342 katssirius wrote: I was shocked back in GOF when Mrs. Weasley turns on Hermione because of Rita's stories. She knows Hermione, she knows Rita and the Prophet, she knows Harry, and she comes down on a 15 year old girl as the obvious one at fault without bothering to check it out first. Joe: Does she know Rita? Is there any canon for that? For that matter does she know Hermione? I mean in the first three books how much time did Mrs. Weasley spend with Hermione? katssirius: In OOTP she has very little patience with Tonks who appears to be well liked by everyone else. Joe: If I remember right she had very little patience because Tonks keeps breaking things, knocking things over and causing the portrait of Mrs. Black to start screaming. Given all the other things going on I can see how that would get on your nerves. katssirius: More often than not the Weasley children treat women as unintelligent and second class with their only value coming from their looks. Joe: Canon please. If I am not much mistaken all of the Weasley but Ron in particular make note of Hermione mental abilities. katsiruis: In COS, the Twins comment on the DADA booklist and in GOF they urge Ron to get a date before all the "good ones" are gone. Joe: Yes, they do say that. Yet I do not believe they ever say that "good ones" means physical appearence. Given the nature of the twins I could well see that they meant girls who like to have fun. Note Fred asks his Quidditch team mate. I think perhaps thinking "good ones" meant pretty is your own personal bias. katssirius: Ron and Ginny are by far the worse. Ron is a caveman in is belief in what makes a good date. She just has to be attractive. Ron and others cruelly attack Eloise Midgin for a skin condition, no boys are ever attacked in the same way. Joe: Holy over reaction batman. Ron isn't a cave man, he is a fourteen year old boy. Yes he makes a less than flattering remark about Eloise Midgin. Not even the most politically correct person alive would call it an attack however. I would like to note that I don't remember her going to the ball so others might have felt the same way. The part about no boys having something bad said about them is also not true. Rona and Harry as well I believe are stunned when they discover that Neville has a date. In short Ron and Harry are both average teenage boys. No boy or girl for that matter thinks "I hope I have a really unattractive date." Katssirius: Ginny's treatment of Fleur is a huge step backward in time to when it was acceptable to say all women competed for men's attention to get their MRS degree. Joe: Somehow having Ginny as a dynamic female character who is able to form her own opinions and is willing to state them forcefully and not let others sway them doen't strike me as a step back in time but to each their own. Katssirius: My question is What does Fleur want with Bill Weasley? She can have anyone, so why doesn't he tell his family to shape up if she is so important to him. Joe: Because Bill loves both his wife to be and his mother. More importantly Bill can more than likely see that both of them are clearly at fault for their not getting along. If they both really love Bill they would get over their childishness. Joe From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed May 17 03:06:39 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 13:06:39 +1000 Subject: Snape the teacher Message-ID: <20060517030538.M35428@alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152343 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > I really don't see all that much to criticize in Snape's teaching > style myself except for the favoritism, which seems to considered > acceptable in his world. I had a number of "Professor Snapes" in my > own academic career. I hated them all at the time, but came to > appreciate how much I had learned in their classes as the years went > by. The "easy" teachers I can barely remember, nor what they taught. > This is a topic I have written about quite extensively in the past, but recently I have found my time quite limited, so I haven't been able to get heavily involved in conversations online. Much to my annoyance - there were parts of the recent sportsmanship topic I would have loved to sink my teeth into. But - well, I can't resist this one. As people who have read my posts on this topic in the past will know I am currently studying to become a teacher - I should have my BEd and be in the classroom next year. Education is something I am passionately interested in, and I have had a lot of involvement in the field over the last ten years or so. The thing is - as I have said previously, I *benefited* greatly from some Snape-like teachers I had as a child. They were among the teachers who taught me best when so many of my other teachers utterly failed to give me what I needed educationally. I won't restate my educational history in detail here, but suffice it to say that if I hadn't encountered a few teachers that were very similar to Snape - and one who made Severus Snape look like Maria Montessori - my life would have been greatly the poorer for it. I wouldn't have benefited from the education I received to anywhere near the same extent that I have. That is, purely and simply, a fact of my own experience. And for this reason, I have to say I often find it rather distressing to see some of the anti-Snape's teaching attitudes I see expressed on this forum. That's not intended as a criticism of other people or as a suggestion they shouldn't freely post their point of view, but I mention it because I often get the impression that these people think that their position is one that is based on some great position of moral authority - "Won't somebody please think of the children?!?" to quote one of The Simpson's many catchphrases. Well, that's fine - but I also believe that my position is based very much on thinking of the children. Of thinking of the children like me who *needed* the occasional Snape in their education to learn. When people start talking about how Snape is such a bad teacher, and how teachers like that should never be allowed near children, and all sorts of statements of that nature, I'm afraid I find it very hard not to take such things somewhat personally. Whole years of my childhood were destroyed by the fact that people had decided that *my* needs didn't matter in comparison to the needs of other children - and that really is what people do when they go around acting as if there's no place for teachers like Snape in schools - because what about those of us who benefited from them? Were we so unimportant that our needs didn't count? Are kids like us in schools today so unimportant that their needs don't matter either? Can we just forget about these kids and what they need so the Nevilles of this world are happy at school? Why is Neville so important? Why does every single class in the school have to be Neville friendly? Because, yes, I do think Neville gets a raw deal from being in Snape's classes and that it probably isn't the right place for him. But I got a raw deal from being in 80% of the classes I attended at school that weren't right for me. And of the minority of classes that worked for me... well, not all those teachers were Snape's (some were McGonagall's) quite a few had a bit of the Snape in them - and others an awful lot of it. I sometimes wonder - those people who are so opposed to Snape's teaching methods - what do they make of kids like me? Do they think we're unimportant? Or do they think we're delusional and utterly mistaken about what worked for us and what didn't? My reason for posting this wasn't really to ask that question though. It was to bring in a little perspective on classroom management and control that I think some people might find interesting in the context of this discussion and maybe a few other little areas as well. In the second half of this year as part of the process of completing my degree, I have to write a thesis and in searching for a possible thesis topic I've been doing a lot of reading and as I read a few of these books, I found myself wondering if perhaps they give a little insight into the issues that come up here surrounding Snape-the-teacher. First of all, I just want to start with two little quotes - at least one of which I have shared before. This first quote comes directly from my most Snape-like teacher (a decade and a half after he taught me, I find him quite easy to talk to) when I mentioned to him that I compared him to Snape and used him as an example of how a Snape-like teacher could be a good thing. He agreed with me that he was like that, and other people had made the comparison. Later on he sent me an e-mail with further discussion of this and I asked his permission to quote this little paragraph. ""I am the best Classics Master in this country. I am an extremely effective teacher. What I am not is warm and cuddly. I don't know how to be. But I do know how to turn obnoxious adolescent boys into people capable of appreciating the combined culture of 25 centuries. Personally I think that's worth doing. If I can't do it without making a few boys cry. Tough. They'll thank me for it as adults. Or they'll hate me. Either way, they'll be better for it." Just a little insight into the thoughts of a self confessed Snape that I think is interesting, and shows how such a person can actually truly have the interests of their students at heart deep down. I'm not saying Snape does when he teaches - I don't know if he does. But I do know that a teacher can have all the appearances of Snape (and more) and really still have his students in mind. The other quote is from the history of one of the schools I attended and concerns one of the other Snape like teachers I had at school. I will be concealing his name, simply because I don't have his permission to expose him like this, but besides that the quote is verbatim. "Another long-serving staff member was ****** ******. Many of his students regard him as the best maths teacher they ever had. 'His style of teaching was very systematic, which I thought was a good way to learn, and he made things quite interesting.' His maths results were without parallel, and he was a particularly good teacher of the brightest students. He tested the boys constantly and read out their results in class while handing back maths tests. This practice produced an extraordinary competitiveness among his students. 'He demanded the best of everyone.' ****** ****** is also remembered as a strict disciplinarian." When I first encountered this man, I was a clinically depressed 13 year old who cried at the drop of a hat, and who had lost all interest in learning after seven years of kind and gentle fluffy-bunny teachers (and a couple of really evil teachers who nonetheless came across in fluffy-bunny style). He was both my Form Master and my House Master that year - and he terrified me every bit as much as Snape seems to terrify Neville. While he wasn't the most Snapish of my teachers (he was probably third) he was the one I think I had the most Neville-like reaction to. And he did scare me. And he did target me, and when my behaviour or laziness warranted it, he did expose me and embarrass me in front of the class. He was also the first teacher to ever introduce me to the reality of the concept of corporal punishment, something that Snape doesn't do (possibly only because he's not allowed to). And yet - he was one of the best teachers I ever had. And if not for his approach I doubt I would have enjoyed any future academic success in my life. And that is a reality. The next book I would like to mention is a scholarly tome called 'Why Gender Matters' by Leonard Sax, M.D., Ph.D. an American paediatrician and psychologist. This book is primarily about the implication of gender differences in child-rearing and teaching and is, I must mention in the interests of fairness - quite controversial in some circles. Personally I think Dr Sax makes some very good points indeed and the research he presents is very extensive and, I feel convincing - but there are people who would certainly disagree. I won't quote this book in general as I have a class to go to in a short time, and this e-mail is taking longer than I expected but there is some material in this book that I think may be very interesting in terms of why different people may see Snape differently. In some cases at least. And that is their gender. I can't demonstrate this statistically but I do have the impression that most of those who express a dislike for Snape *as a teacher* on this list are female, and most of those who express support for his teaching style as valid are male. Sax talks about how boys and girls react to different classroom management styles differently (in general - none of this is absolute) in a reasonable amount of detail. I won't go into all of this now - I can be a bit more detailed if people want - but Sax presents the idea that a confrontational, in-your-face approach to classroom management that can even involve yelling at a child works well with a lot of boys - but would be a very bad approach for most girls - who tend to respond better to a supportive, non-confrontational approach. Stress improves learning in males - but impairs it in females (again, this is a generalisation - Sax actually devotes quite a bit of time towards the end of his book looking at some reasons why the generalisations are not always true, but as generalisations they do work). The point is though - that gender may make a difference here to the way some of us are seeing Snape's teaching style. I had intended to go into this in more detail but this is getting very long - people should feel free to ask if they want me to try and explore this in more detail. I don't want to totally bore people. 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 jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Wed May 17 03:13:42 2006 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (Jazmyn Concolor) Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:13:42 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <446A94E6.9050106@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152344 zgirnius wrote: >>Joe: >>He might be a good guy but that whole 17/18 year old international >>quidditch star asking a 14/15 year old girl out strikes me as more >>than a little creepy. >> >> >> >zgirnius: >Hermione has a September birthday, so make that 15. > >It does not strike me as particularly odd. I remember quite distinctly >one of my classmates freshman year in high school getting asked to the >Senior Prom by a star of the high school football (the US kind) team. >(Unlike Hermione, she trumpeted her good fortune far and wide, or I >would never have known, as only seniors and their dates attend the >Prom.) > >Yes, we could imagine that Krum would prefer a supermodel or some such >equivalent in the WW, but he's stuck at Hogwarts for the year, so >schoolgirls are his only available option. He is still in school >himself. > > > The whole fact Hermione was using a time turner to make it to all her classes has HAD to effect her real age.. Has anyone considered that? She might really be closer to 16 after all that tinkering with time. Jazmyn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 17 03:27:27 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 03:27:27 -0000 Subject: CHAPT DICUSS 15 The Unbreakable Vow In-Reply-To: <302.51ec6bb.319bd9b4@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152345 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, puduhepa98 at ... wrote: > > > >>Carol: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > > Chapter 15, The Unbreakable Vow. > > > > > And why would Slughorn invite Trelawney, of all people, along > > with his Slug Club, his celebrity guests, and his former star > > pupil, Severus Snape? > Pippin: Prophecies have been in the news lately. Doubtless people would want the opinion of the Hogwarts divination teacher and Slughorn could drop her name to entice others to attend. She seldom leaves her tower, so only those who've actually had her for divination will have met her before. Trelawney has always been quite happy to foretell Harry's fate. Snape is probably there to protect her. Pippin From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 17 04:03:07 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 00:03:07 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Snape the teacher References: Message-ID: <009a01c67966$cec3ee90$a3ba400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152346 Carol: > Carol, who can't understand why readers are ready to forgive Draco for > trying to murder Dumbledore and nearly killing two schoolmates through > his carelessness but not to forgive Merope, who is not much older, for > trying to find love in the wrong way Magpie: Ooh, I was hoping for this one, since it so often comes back to "I can't understand why so many people [fill in the blank] Draco..." :-) I am very willing to forgive Merope. I didn't think that was the basis for the discussion. If it comes to how I feel about her as a character I think she's really sad and feel sympathy for her. I just think I can do that without distorting what happened and why, or making Tom into a villain. She did something to Tom Riddle, and he didn't do much to her--I can forgive him too. She drugged a man with a love potion because she wanted love, got an artificial version for a while, and once she stopped the potion he went back to the man he really was all along, a man who didn't love her. That must have been upsetting if Tom in love was a husband she'd want to have, as he may well have been. I feel sorry for her, but I don't think Tom Riddle is the person to look to as the source of her misery. I don't think we're told he's ever cruel to her. He just wants to get away from her, which to her was possibly the most painful thing for her. Had he provided for her and her child with money there's a good chance things would have ended the same way, with Merope dumping Tom in an anonymous Muggle orphanage and dying, because as a character she was about the despair at not being loved. It's not like she was a girl trying her best to survive and just couldn't. To put Draco in a similar situation, I would look perhaps at his would-be murder victims. Dumbledore does seem to forgive him, that seems an important thing. Do Ron and Katie forgive him? I don't know, but I don't think they owe it to him to forgive him. If he apologized to them it would be good for Draco, but they might hold it against him for the rest of their lives. So might Bill hold it against him for being responsible for Fenrir being in the castle. There's nothing he could really do about that. Draco and Merope are both two people in less than happy situations who nevertheless choose to do bad things of their own free will. I wouldn't condemn either of them completely yet. Sean Hately: Can we just forget about these kids and what they need so the Nevilles of this world are happy at school? Why is Neville so important? Why does every single class in the school have to be Neville friendly? Magpie: Honestly, I think this is the center of the whole discussion of Snape-as-teacher. Not whether or not classes should be Neville-friendly, but that the teachers in Hogwarts are designed to remind us of familiar types of teachers. Those of us who have positive associations with Snape's type will feel better about Snape. I have negative reactions to Hagrid as a teacher, but I think it's good that I'm not able to just outlaw them from schools. That's not to say Snape's behavior can't be criticized and that he shouldn't be reprimanded. His bullying of Harry, especially, is just embarassing to watch. But outside of Harry, he does seem well within the bounds of teacher. The real Snape, iirc, when told about the books his former student had written, described his fictional counterpart as "a very elegant revenge," which didn't surprise me. I'm female btw, and I don't relate to Snape as a teacher who humiliates or reads out grades and things like that. I remember the teachers I had who did that as jerks and that sort of thing didn't help me at all. Any teacher who yelled at me would have to work really hard to get me back. It's more his general manner and sarcasm and all that that reminds me of teachers I didn't hate. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 04:04:56 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 04:04:56 -0000 Subject: Love Potion/Hate Potion Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152347 Hmmm, just wanted to share that I discovered a canon fact that I did not know existed ( hides in shame if everybody else knew that fact but me). Thank you Lexicon! :) I went to Lexicon to see if I am missing some crucial facts about Love potions and instead discovered that at some point JKR referenced the existance of Hate Potion which reveals all the faults of the targeted person to the caster. Am wondering whether this will come as important or not. Somebody drank Hate Potion in the past? Hmm, maybe Snape in order to think bad of Lily when he joined Voldy and Co? Speculating of course, Alla From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed May 17 04:25:21 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 04:25:21 -0000 Subject: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: <20060517030538.M35428@alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152348 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: > Sax talks about how boys and girls react to different classroom > management styles differently (Snip)Sax presents the idea that a > confrontational, in-your-face approach to classroom management that can even involve yelling at a child works well with a lot of boys - but would be a very bad approach for most girls - who tend to respond better to a supportive, non-confrontational approach. > > Stress improves learning in males - but impairs it in females (again, this is a generalisation - Sax actually devotes quite a bit of time towards the end of his book looking at some reasons why the generalisations are not always true, but as generalisations they do work). > > The point is though - that gender may make a difference here to the way some of us are seeing Snape's teaching style. Tonks: Thank you Shaun for that very insightful and informative post. I think you have hit the nail on the head here. I am female and defend Snape, but that is because I am putting myself in his place. If he were my teacher when I was a child, I would have been Neville. As I child I needed a warm, loving nurturing teacher. I got enough negative comments from my mother, so a kind teacher would have been the best thing for me. I was not rebellious like a boy might be, all anyone would have had to do to keep me in line was just to look a bit disapprovingly at me. When I defend Snape and his teaching style I am thinking as a 58 year old woman with no patience for children and even less for teenagers!! I can see your point that the teenage boys need someone like Snape to get their attention and get them to focus on the lessons instead of smarting off in the back of the room. When I think of Snape, I remember a job I took once out of total desperation to have a job ASAP because I was broke. I had to be a substance abuse therapist for a group of teenagers. My second week the therapist that was training me gave me a group of 15 teenagers to do by myself. (First that is too big for a group with only one therapist, but that is another story.) Let me tell you those kids were a living hell. I could not get control of them. I am too nice. I wish I could be like Snape. I admire him and his abilities. Yes, I do! And he makes no appologies for being nasty. He doesn't care what others think of him. I admire him for that. (In case you wonder, that was the last group I ever did. I quite the next day.) I would rather live under the bridge and eat out of garbage bins than to face a group of damn teenagers ever again. I hate them. So this is where I am coming from when I think of Snape. And yes, I wanted to help those kids, but they didn't want my help. They just wanted to give me a hard time. I think Snape sees some of his students the same way. I can see where Snape is happy to help students who are smart and want to do well and those like Harry.. well you do have to admit that Harry does mouth off at times.. and doesn't care about the class.. etc. Now I know some are going to say that Snape gives Hermione, who is a good student, a hard time too. But he doesn't give her much of one compared to the boys. I can remember having male teachers and they were not by nature warm and cuddly, but they were nice to the girl students probably because they thought of girl as emotionally fragile back then. And they were harder on the boy, now that I come to think of it. I think that men are just harder on boys in general. I have a friend who is a good person, helpful and kind in his own way. But he is very curd and has that odd sense of humor that is very sarcastic. I am sure that some of his students see him as Snape. But he was seen as a good teacher and moved up from a sub. to a full time teacher with the more difficult students and that was a good match for all of them. He is the only teacher that those kids respect. But I can not be like him. I worry about hurting peoples feeling, I worry about being liked, I would feel guilty if I treated people like that. But my Snape like friend is a good teacher and just what some kids needs. So again Snape is not a child abuser. And DD does not condone child abuse by allowing him to teach. I just finished listening to the part of HBP where DD refused LV a teaching position. I think that shows very clearly that DD does protect his students. He would never let a person like LV anywhere near the students. Unfortunately he had no choice in the matter when it came to Umbridge. Tonks_op From bawilson at citynet.net Wed May 17 04:19:41 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 00:19:41 -0400 Subject: Tom Riddle, Sr. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152349 To those ladies who say that a man cannot feel hurt, humiliation, residual anger, even PTSD, etc. as a consequence of being forced into an unwanted sexual encounter, all I can say is that I am very glad that I am not YOUR husband or boyfriend. Tom certainly didn't suffer the PHYSICAL trauma of rape, but MENTALLY and EMOTIONALLY he most probably did after the potion wore off. I'm sure that his memory of what he did to/with Merope was unaffected was not in any way altered after the potion wore off, and I'm sure that the thought of having been with THAT nauseated him, to say the least. And, don't overlook the other possibility--Dumbledore suggested, IIRC, that perhaps Merope used rather than a love potion the Imperius Curse (he said that a love potion was more likely, but still. . . ); that would have been even worse from Tom's point of view, because during each encounter he would have been like two people--the one who was 'doing it' and the other who was standing to one side screaming "NOOOO!" If that isn't rape, I don't know what is. OOTP says that none of the Riddle family were very nice people, but NOBODY deserves that. BAW [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From h.m.s at mweb.co.za Wed May 17 06:20:36 2006 From: h.m.s at mweb.co.za (H.M.S) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 08:20:36 +0200 Subject: Scar Speculation Message-ID: <005301c6797a$138126c0$cbd517c4@Sharon> No: HPFGUIDX 152350 Steven: "JKR has stated in an interview that, as things stand, the last word of the final Book will be "scar". Given this information has anyone speculated, or does anyone now want to speculate, what the last SENTENCE will be?" JKR has also said that the last chapter will tell us a bit about the characters' future. So I hope that the final sentence will be along the lines of Harry & Ginny's son looks just like Harry but without the SCAR. I would prefer this type of ending to: the last thing Harry ever felt was a searing pain in his SCAR! Sharon From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Wed May 17 06:41:10 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 06:41:10 -0000 Subject: Krum taking a 'mudblood' to Yuleball In-Reply-To: <446A94E6.9050106@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152351 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Jazmyn Concolor wrote: Jazmyn: > The whole fact Hermione was using a time turner to make it to all her > classes has HAD to effect her real age.. Has anyone considered that? She > might really be closer to 16 after all that tinkering with time. Geoff: Yes, but let's get things in proportion. Hermione has been using the Time-Turner since the beginning of the school year: '"It's called a Time-Turner," Hermione whispered, "and I got it from Professor McGonagall on out first day back. I've been using it all year to get to lessons."" (POA "Hermione's Secret" p.289 UK edition) Assuming that the school year corresponds to the general English pattern of 40 weeks, that is 200 teaching days. If Hermione goes back, say, an hour for each of three lessons on each and every one of those days, that adds 600 hours to her life. So she will be approximately three and a half weeks older which is no real big deal in terms of her age. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Wed May 17 07:48:24 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 07:48:24 -0000 Subject: Ginny's Behavior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152352 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > Surely you can't mean anything so sexist. But, if not, what DO you > mean? > > Conversely, we have elder adult sibling who is (Ginny fifteen, Ron > sixteen, twins eighteen, Percy twenty iirc, Charlie twenty-three, Bill > twenty-five) around twenty-five years old, on his own, earning a > living, dating the same girl for a year (OotP evidence, much too lazy > to look up the citation), engaged to the girl he's been seeing for that > year, being criticized by a snot-nosed fifteen year old sib who adores > him and probably doesn't want him to marry *anybody* who will take him > away from her, which pretty much means anybody at all. Can you see the > difference beyond the sex of the two in question? Canon for that please. What I saw and have already backed up with canon is a very stuck up, egocentric and vain guest who looks down on their home and who is going to be family. No wonder Mrs. weasley , Ginny and the twins don't like that and it is also clear Ron is still a bit taken with her. This also obviously is part of why Hermione does not like her, but it is also for a great part due to Fleut being 'so full of herself' Yes, calling her Phlegm is typically teenage behaviour but it is clear that the reason is the way Fleur is acting, Gerry From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed May 17 10:26:58 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 10:26:58 -0000 Subject: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152353 Tonks: > As I child I needed a warm, loving nurturing teacher. I got enough negative comments from my mother, so a kind teacher would have been the best thing for me. I was not rebellious like a boy might be, all anyone would have had to do to keep me in line was just to look a bit disapprovingly at me. Ceridwen: Same here. But as a child, I didn't attract the ire of most Snape- like teachers simply because a look was enough. And Rowling puts a lot of effort into describing Snape's eyes - maybe he is giving Harry 'the Look', but Harry doesn't notice that's what is going on and ends up at the next stages of such teachers. Tonks: > When I defend Snape and his teaching style I am thinking as a 58 year old woman with no patience for children and even less for teenagers!! Ceridwen: I'm only fifty, so this isn't *quite* a 'me-too' post. *g* I just went back to school after thirty some-odd years out, and I pray for a Snape-like teacher. The students I have seen in class are rude, overbearing, insensitive to the needs of the students around them, and so thoroughly self-centered that they need to be sat down with something akin to the roar of old Leo of MGM fame. I have suffered through students talking to each other in class to the point where I could barely hear. One group of girls decided to have a confab during a test. One had informed another that a mutual friend had died, and they were discussing the upcoming funeral. During a test. Fine and dandy, but really, even such devastating news is not for test time. Take it outside, for the sake of students like me who were struggling with the material. When the teacher called them on their talking, the one girl who had just found out turned around and called the teacher rude for interrupting their discussion. Teen- agers, even ones out of high school and into college, are not my favorite people. Tonks: > Let me tell you those kids were a living hell. I could not get control of them. I am too nice. I wish I could be like Snape. I admire him and his abilities. Yes, I do! And he makes no appologies for being nasty. He doesn't care what others think of him. I admire him for that. Ceridwen: This is a big 'me, too'. Snape has control of his classes, as much as teachers can have these days. Being back in a classroom with fellow students made me rethink my position on Harry and Ron and their attitude about Snape, and the one thing that keeps running through my mind every time there is a 'Snape is a rotten teacher' thread is Ron's smart-mouthed response that they didn't need to listen to Snape in Potions. That about sums it up for me any more. Tonks: > And yes, I wanted to help those kids, but they didn't want my help. They just wanted to give me a hard time. I think Snape sees some of his students the same way. Ceridwen: That's what teens do. And, more and more, young twenty-somethings as well. I can completely go along with Shaun's assessment of the fluffy-bunny teachers - they create monsters who are unable to handle criticism. While they're in school, they have leverage over the teachers since they're kids, and the Simpsons have it pegged just right - 'think about the ***children***'. Oy! And now, look at the children who have been graduated from these sorts of programs where all of the teachers are definitely not like Snape. They won't accept help, they think that they're the only ones with the right answers and no one in the last few thousands of years of human existence has come up with their *ahem* unique solutions to problems which have plagued Mankind for, well, millenia. And they're willing to risk all of humanity on their experiments, never mind any wisdom of the ages and of successive generations going back to Lucy of the Savannah. Arrogant at the least, and on top of that, they don't care what they do to others as long as they have their way. Tonks: > I can remember having male teachers and they were not by nature warm and cuddly, but they were nice to the girl students probably because they thought of girl as emotionally fragile back then. And they were harder on the boy, now that I come to think of it. I think that men are just harder on boys in general. Ceridwen: I had the same sorts of teachers. But, I had some female Snapes, too, who were just as hard on the girls when it was warranted. It usually wasn't, because in those days, girls were raised differently than boys, to be more agreeable and compliant. But, the females who were strict and brooked no argument in their classes, expected a lot more out of their students, male and female alike, and did definitely see the desperate need to teach students to bear their responsibilities in a way that fluffy-bunny teachers did not. The bunnies always had some excuse for the behavior without trying to stop it, disadvantaging the entire class for the few who misbehaved. I would love to walk into class today and see Snape at the blackboard. We have all mentioned the Harry filter on occasion. I think Snape's so-called abusive style is part of that. He doesn't seem to have the same issues with Snape in HBP. Even the over-the-top descriptions of Snape's style have pretty much gone. Harry is growing up, has lost Sirius, is facing a war where he knows he must fight and possibly die. Petty things like disagreement with a teacher seem to have slipped below his own radar, saving the annoyance for more substantial things like the disagreement in the way to fight Dementors. I expect that Harry had the fluffy-bunnies in his Muggle school prior to entering Hogwarts. These teachers did not confront students, but then, they didn't seem to do much to stop Dudley and his gang from terrorizing Harry on the playground, either. Non- confrontational means not confronting bullies as well. And since Harry was being at the least psychologically abused at home, and obviously neglected since he wore Dudley's hand-me-downs when the Dursleys could afford better, these were the teachers who failed him the worst. Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed May 17 10:45:26 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 10:45:26 -0000 Subject: Love Potion/Hate Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152354 Alla: > Hmmm, just wanted to share that I discovered a canon fact that I did not know existed ( hides in shame if everybody else knew that fact but me). Thank you Lexicon! :) I went to Lexicon to see if I am missing some crucial facts about Love potions and instead discovered that at some point JKR referenced the existance of Hate Potion which reveals all the faults of the targeted person to the caster. Ceridwen: I didn't know it either. I'm glad you brought it up! Alla: > Am wondering whether this will come as important or not. Somebody drank Hate Potion in the past? Hmm, maybe Snape in order to think bad of Lily when he joined Voldy and Co? Ceridwen: (cringing at the thought of Snape and Lily yet again) I do think this is something worth thinking about. Snape could not have been a 'superb Occlumens' at sixteen and seventeen years of age. Look at Draco. He is able to hide his thoughts, but not so the person attempting Legilimency cannot see. His attempt is awkward and obvious. Not the best thing to be around LV! If there was some reason why Snape having friendly feelings toward Lily, of whatever variety, meant something to his hoped-for position as a Death Eater, then he would need something to make himself seem to hate her. I could be wrong about Snape, maybe Occlumency was one of those Dark Arts things he knew as an eleven year old that so negatively impressed Sirius. But I tend to doubt it. He probably had the makings of a decent Occlumens at that time, like Draco. But I can't see that he was already skilled to the point he is in the books (as a man in his thirties) to believe that he could get away with disguising his feelings well enough to deceive LV at seventeen or eighteen years old, whenever he joined the DEs. So, yes, if there was something of that nature going on with Snape and his feelings, then a hate potion would make more sense to me than having him be a perfect Occlumens at such a young age. By the way, what are the long-term side effects of love and hate potions? I know JKR hasn't gone into that, not that I've seen referenced, anyway. But Voldemort was conceived while his father was on a love potion... Well, wait a minute, could it be that his mother took or wore the love potion? There are so many things we don't know! Ceridwen. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 17 13:58:14 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 13:58:14 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152355 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > And once again we are back to manipulative Dumbledore who allows > Snape to be nasty and abusive as a way of training Harry. Pippin: And here I thought Harry was at school to be trained. How is that manipulative? It's already been said that Dumbledore, or Snape himself, held Snape to a higher standard than that tolerated by wizarding society, if Umbridge is any guide. But if (DDM!)Snape's problem is repressed anger at James, would forcing Snape to repress his anger even more have produced any positive result, or would his anger, already seeping through in unproductive ways, have carved some new and unpredictable channel for itself? Dumbledore has admitted that he doesn't know how to cure Snape of his James issues. Telling Snape he has to get over them or else doesn't sound wise or understanding to me. Pippin From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Wed May 17 14:31:07 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 15:31:07 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060517143107.72893.qmail@web86205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152356 --- pippin_999 wrote: > > Dumbledore has admitted that he doesn't know how to > cure Snape of > his James issues. Acknowledging them would be a good start. I think one of Snape's greatest grievances comes from the fact that his point of view was never acknowledged as a legitimate one. Not by Dumbledore, not by anybody else. BTW, if Lupin in PoA climax was looking for ways to enrage Snape further, he could not have chosen a better way than to refer to his "silly schoolboy grudge" or some such. Irene Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From lunalovegood at shaw.ca Wed May 17 14:34:05 2006 From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (tbernhard2000) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 14:34:05 -0000 Subject: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: <20060517030538.M35428@alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152357 Shaun wrote: > But I do know that a teacher can have all the appearances of Snape (and more) and really still have his students in mind. But Shaun, it's not just appearences of Snape that we have - it's actions - Rowling goes a great length to show that Snape can accuse wrongly, while still being close to the mark. The lesson - those who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear. Most of the time. This has been mentioned on the list a few times over the last day in the context of totalitarianism. > 'He demanded the best of everyone.' ****** ****** is also remembered as a strict disciplinarian." This is not disciplinarianism we're talking about, though, but in class prejudice against certain students. Was your teacher afraid of any of the boys parents, as in a Lucius Malfoy? Did he have a pet, as in Draco? These are the things that stick out for me... > When I first encountered this man, I was a clinically depressed 13 year old who cried at the drop of a hat Thank you for the personal perspective. I've read it numerous times on this list. It identifies your argument as substantially a personal testimonial, though, and the differences from Rowling's work are evident. Harry is not clinically depressed, for example. > I can't demonstrate this statistically but I do have the impression that most of those who express a dislike for Snape *as a teacher* on this list are female, and most of those who express support for his teaching style as valid are male. Shaun, this is impossible to say. I'm male, and I think Snape is a nasty cow. We CAN say that most of the people on the list are female. My own impression is that more men hate Snape, in fact. Not ALL of this can be attributed to the Rickman effect. :) > Sax presents the idea that a confrontational, in-your-face approach to classroom management that can even involve yelling at a child works well with a lot of boys - but would be a very bad approach for most girls - who tend to respond better to a supportive, non-confrontational approach. And the context for "working well" really defies analysis - I'm certain the lives of adolescents are affected by their teachers in countless ways - does the study say, for example, that it works well with boys because they internalize the criticism differently, and act out against, for instance, other boys at recess? These studies are quite silly, at some point. Look at the internal processing of Harry after using the frightening slasher curse in HBP - he's not internalizing Snape's voice, but remembering a voice we've heard long before - he internal ethical compass, as it were. I'd trust that with my life more than some side-effect of a disciplinary teaching style. > Stress improves learning in males Again, as you identify, we would need to define our terms much more clearly. Learning math? Learning how to instruct others? Learning what is good or bad? When is humiliation good, or when does it work in instruction? What part of teaching is the instruction in so-called facts and what is the passing along of beliefs about reality, that may be different in 10 years? Which students strive to grasp the transient, and which are focussed where on something less passing, like literature, say? Who has stress at home, in the dorms? What is the nature of the external stresses affecting each student? How does that mix with Snape's teaching? Etc. etc. > The point is though - that gender may make a difference here to the way some of us are seeing Snape's teaching style. Well, the fact that males learn better with stress-producing teachers than girls doesn't mean ANYTHING about how men and women appreciate any particular style of teaching. These are separate things. dan From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed May 17 14:44:26 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 14:44:26 -0000 Subject: Ginny's Behavior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152358 Gerry: > Canon for that please. What I saw and have already backed up with canon is a very stuck up, egocentric and vain guest who looks down on their home and who is going to be family. No wonder Mrs. weasley , Ginny and the twins don't like that and it is also clear Ron is still a bit taken with her. This also obviously is part of why Hermione does not like her, but it is also for a great part due to Fleut being 'so full of herself' Yes, calling her Phlegm is typically teenage behaviour but it is clear that the reason is the way Fleur is acting Ceridwen: I'm not sure which you want canon for - the ages of the Weasley children? Ginny's adoration for Bill? Or for the criticism by a 'snot-nosed fifteen year old sib who adores him and probably doesn't want him to marry *anybody* who will take him away from her, which pretty much means anybody at all'? I saw Fleur as fighting back against a tide of dislike from her fiance's mother and sister, not as being the agressor in the criticism war. It hadn't gotten to the most horrible point during the summer, but by Christmas, it was out of control. So when Fleur called Molly on her unfounded assumption in the hospital wing in HBP (US Scholastic hardcover pg 623) I was not at all surprised. She had been fighting that attitude from Molly and Ginny the whole year, and between the stress of the year and the stress of the moment, she most definitely told them off: "You thought I would not weesh to marry him? Or per'aps, you hoped?" said Fleur, her nostrils flaring. I completely saw where she got the idea that Molly didn't like her and *hoped* she would forget about Bill. And on page 622, Ginny's eyes narrow slightly as she watches Fleur with Bill. Eyes usually only narrow in dislike, absent bright light. One way people try to drive away an unwanted person is by treating them shabbily. I thought Molly and Ginny treated Fleur very shabbily. As the hosts, and Molly as the prospective Mother-in-law, they had more of a burden to try and make their guest feel at home, even in the face of rudeness. Instead, they laid into her, did things they knew she wouldn't like, called her names not quite behind her back and laughed about her in ways that I imagine she could at least see if not hear. If you saw it differently, all you need to do is look around a minute to see how many people read the same scenes and envision something different. But, you began your last post to me by accusing me of sexism. I must have run across your canon support for your viewpoint about Fleur, but I went upthread and couldn't find it. It must be elsewhere. Could you point me to the post? Thanks! Ceridwen. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 12:23:48 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 05:23:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060517122349.61390.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152360 Julie: I don't think Tom's situation is analagous to rape because no physical incapacity or coercion was involved, rather his emotions were played with. It is more analagous to a man telling a woman he loves her and wants to marry her just to get sex. That sexual relationship is based on deceit, just as Tom and Merope's sexual relationship is based on deceit, on the effect of the love potion making Tom believe he cared for her. Just as a woman would be justifiably angry at being tricked into believing a man loved her, I think Tom is justifiably angry at being tricked into believing he loved Merope. But I still don't see it as rape. Alla: I disagree. In the situation you describe man or woman can still CHOOSE whether to believe those lies or trickery or not. Granted, the liar can play their part very well, but IMO there is still a choice. The person under the influence of love potion has absolutely no choice but to feel "affection" for the person who drugs the other person, no? Just as in rape there is absolutely no choice for other person involved. I don't remember canon supporting the argument that love potions can be overcomed somehow? Maria8162001 here: Bear with me nice elves if I don't snip anything from this conversation. I'm a woman and a mother of 3 children, but I agree with Alla and Gerry in this. What Merope did IMO is also rape and he violated TOm Sr's rights, physically and mentally. She used love potion to make Tom Sr. marry her, is that rape? IMO, YES! Why? because even in marriage without using love potion if a woman is forced by her husband to have sex with her when she doesn't want it, that is also called rape. A husband cannot forced his own wife to make love or have sex with him if she doesn't want to without calling it as rape. So how much more with a false marriage like what Merope did to Tome Sr. Julie: Again he wasn't violated, IMO, he was tricked, into believing he loved her because she was gorgeous and desirable in his eyes, when she really wasn't once he saw how she really looked. Alla: But what's the difference here? Is there any? He had no choice but to have sex with her the way I see it. maria8162001: There is no diffrence, tricking him into believing he love her because she so desirable in his eyes because of the love potion is still a violation. That is the same as being drug or drunk,IMO. Julie: BTW, Tom doesn't have to stare the child in the face. He can simply help provide for its care, or help arrange an adoption if Merope is unable or unwilling to care for the child. Alla: Sure, he can and I would think that he is a great man if he did so, it would be very admirable, but since he did not do so, I think that he is a hurt man, broken even, since if I may say again he almost never left the house after he came back. That is to me the behaviour of the trauma victim. maria8162001: Easier said than done. Like what Alla said Tom Sr; would be a great man to do that. IMO, I don't think anyone from us, male or female would actually do what most are suggesting that Tom Sr., could have at least support the child or could have arrange something for the child. If what happened to Tom sr., would happen to anybody from us I bet we would all do the same cut off our contact from the person who rape, decieved and violated us. It would take a great man(man or woman) to actually still have contact with anyone who violated them, with or without child. If that happen to me I would really hate the person and I would not want to see and have contact with that person ever with or without a child and I am not even certain what I woulddo if there's a child involved as a result of that rape, deciet and violation or whatever others will call it. It is not the fault of the child and the child cannot help it, I know but I cannot help it also if that happens and certainly TomSr., cannot help it also he just didn't to have any part of that anymore. Julie: We have *no* clue what conversation transpired between Merope and Tom, though it's a good bet she did beg for forgiveness, as she certainly wanted him to stay with her. Granting forgiveness is of course his choice, and clearly he didn't do so since he left and had no further contact with her or the child that we know of. Alla: Of course. It is possible, I was just saying that there is no such conversation described. And if I may say again, we don't even know if Tom knew of Merope's pregnancy. Not that I would think worse of him, if he did knew, but who knows, maybe indeed he was such a good man that he would have cared for the child which Merope beared. maria8162001: All I could say in this is Merope is well capable of giving a better life for her son if she wanted to, but she chose not to. I do not blame Tom sr., for this I blame Merope. She should take responsibility for her action. this is what we all have to know and remember for everything we do there are consequences and we should take responsiblity for our every actions and not blame it on anybody. Julie: I think she would have a moral obligation to make sure the child was cared for. She could choose to ignore that obligation, and society might not even condemn her for it, but that doesn't make it morally right. Alla: Okay, fair enough. This is at least consistent position. I don't agree with it at all, but I understand. maria8162001: Yes she would have moral obligation but I don't think she would do anything for the child also if the situation was reverse. Why do you think in our own society there are a lot of unwanted children and abortion? Because in real most people even especially the rich/aristocrats doesn't take their moral obligations. Now a days it's more easy, they would just have an abotion anywhere, rich and poor alike. And they were not even raped they just do not want the child. So how much more if you were raped, violated or decieved. com' on let's be real. Gerry: I totally agree with that, but I don't agree it is Tom who should give the compassion, the forgiveness or the love. Alla: I really like what Gerry said. What I meant is that I have to remind myself that she is a victim of abuse after I read what she did to Tom. Since I said that I see it as rape, I can see her upbringing as explanation, but not as justification of what she did at all. She loses all my empathy when I read those scenes, that is why I have to remind myself that she suffered at home in order to not have completely one sided picture of her in my head, because if I would have only read about her and Tom without her upbringing, well then I would see her close to monster, frankly. And I don't see how her intent was not to harm if she knew that Tom loved another woman. maria8162001: I'm with Gerry, I don't think as well that it is Tom who should give her the compassion, forgiveness and love. Can anybody really say that after they have been raped, violated or decieved that they would honestly have compassion or forgive and love the person who violated them? Now a days, people always use their upbringings as an excuse for their misbehavior because the lawyers made it so. IMO, it is Tom Sr., who is the victim and not Merope. Merope have take responsibility for her actions and face the consequences but whet chose is just get out the easy way. She wanted Tom, she wanted to have a child from so at least she should have take responsibilty for her action by caring for her own child. JMO From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 16:16:54 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:16:54 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152361 Betsy Hp wrote: > You're completely and totally wrong about this, Carol. Rape is rape > is rape. Male or female, a victim of rape *is* effected. Just look > at some of the testimony at the "Priest trials" here in the United > States. Those young men were effected for a very long time after > they were raped. Just look at the "teacher trials" going on now. > > And we have absolutely no clue as to Tom's sexual experience before > he was taken prisoner by Merope. For all we know he *was* a > virgin. We know he was a young man (19?), and we only have evidence > of one female friend. We also know that he was a product of 1930's > England, where sex education was probably pretty backwords. And of > course, he didn't believe in witches. Tom was violated in a way > he'd never dreamed possible. > > Honestly, what if it had been Morfin (who did break into Tom's > bedroom at least once) who'd whisked Tom away to have his way with > him? Would you still consider Tom a willing partner to his rape? Carol responds: Thank you for the circular definition, Betsy, but I know what rape is, and if I didn't, I'm afraid that "rape is rape is rape" wouldn't enlighten me. I am more than a bit offended that you would imply that I have no compassion for the victims of pederasty and homosexual rape, which of course are brutal and horrendous crimes. May I politely point that we are talking about something rather different here? Nor can what Merope did be compared to Morfin whisking Tom away to have homosexual sex with him. Merope gave Tom a *Love* potion. Given her background, is it not conceivable that she took the name at face value and thought that it would make him *love* her? It was not, after all, called a *sex* potion. Nor do we have any evidence that Merope lusted after Tom, only that she liked to look at him, and that love of any sort was absent from her life. And speaking of youth and inexperience, Merope was probably also in her teens and certainly a virgin. As for sex education, Tom may have learned a bit from his male friends (boys generally do, for better or worse), but Merope had no one to tell her about it. (Given the men in her life, she may not even have known that sex existed.) I refer you to my post 152331 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152331 for evidence that Merope is a most unlikely rapist and far more traumatized than Tom AFAWK. Nor are the effects of a love potion, which causes a powerful obsession with a particular person, at all comparable to those of a date rape drug, which incapacitates the drinker, often rendering him, or more often her, unconscious. http://www.4woman.gov/faq/rohypnol.htm Tom was clearly not unconscious when he took his marriage vows, nor during the one time when we know that they had sex. We know that Tom claimed to be "hoodwinked," meaning that he was tricked into marrying Merope, not into having sex with her. Surely the marriage to a woman he didn't love, a marriage that he could not legally escape from, was a more serious matter to a young man like Tom than a few acts of what would have been consensual sex with a woman he thought he loved or revulsion at the thought of sex with Merope? We have *no* evidence that he was traumatized, only that he returned to live with his parents (as he would have done because he was no longer free to marry), and that he was "unpopular," regarded as even more "snobbish" and "rude" than his parents (GoF Am. ed. 2), hardly an attitude that the villagers would take if he never left the house. He made no effort to find his wife and child, not because he was traumatized but because he wanted nothing to do with them. The welfare of his unborn child and the possibility that the child and its mother might die of starvation were a matter of complete indifference to him. Carol earlier: > > > > He lost his marital prospects; she was condemned, along with her unborn child, to a life of misery. > > > > Betsy Hp: > No, Tom lost his mind. Carol again: Evidence, please? I would consult "The Riddle House" in GoF before responding, as it provides the only evidence of his conduct after deserting his wife and unborn child, other than the claim that he was "hoodwinked," most unlikely to have been made by a man who had lost his mind. Nor, as I said earlier, would a recluse be regarded as "rude" and "snobbish," "even worse" than his parents, by the villagers. I am not asking anyone to condemn Tom Sr., who, like Merope, did wrong (neglecting his unborn child and his pathetically unlovable young wife) under understandable circumstances. Nor, even though I don't see him as a rape victim, am I taking away his status as the victim of trickery and delusion. Certainly his prospects for a happy and socially acceptable marriage were ruined and he was understandably bitter and angry. Nevertheless, I maintain that he had a duty to provide for his unwanted child, especially given his wealth. It would have cost him little to provide a clean, safe cottage far from Little Hangleton and a small allowance for Merope and their child. That he would have allowed his own child to die makes him much worse, IMO, than the Dursleys, and partially responsible for the hatred that his son bore him (and Muggles in general). Should he be forgiven, given that he was tricked into marriage? Perhaps, especially if he repented in the end, and certainly he did not deserve to be murdered. But does being a victim justify victimizing in return? No, it does not. It merely perpetuates the vicious circle. All I am asking is a little understanding and compassion for Merope, who does not fit the pattern of a rapist or even a seductress. She, too, was a victim, and it's clear to me that what she wanted was not sex or even necessarily marriage but love. I am afraid that certain members of this list would have burned her at the stake if they had discovered her "crime." (How dare a woman use power of any sort on a man? She must be an evil seductress, no, a rapist, and a witch at that! Send her out to die of starvation with her unborn brat! That's the mentality I'm seeing here, and I don't think it's the view that JKR wants us to have.) Carol, who would appreciate logical, canon-based counterarguments rather than circular defininitions, false analogies, insinuations that she is heartless, and claims that she is "completely and totally wrong," which prove nothing except that the poster disagrees with her opinions, as I do with hers From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 12:35:13 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 05:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: <20060517030538.M35428@alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: <20060517123513.67667.qmail@web61314.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152362 Shaun Hately wrote: The thing is - as I have said previously, I *benefited* greatly from some Snape-like teachers I had as a child. Joe: Thats fair enough but how many of your fellow students educations suffered because of the method that allowed you to flourish. Shaun: Whole years of my childhood were destroyed by the fact that people had decided that *my* needs didn't matter in comparison to the needs of other children - and that really is what people do when they go around acting as if there's no place for teachers like Snape in schools - because what about those of us who benefited from them? Were we so unimportant that our needs didn't count? Are kids like us in schools today so unimportant that their needs don't matter either? Joe: No your needs were important but that shows one of the great flaws of Snape. A good teacher is able to reach out to almost all students. Shaun: Can we just forget about these kids and what they need so the Nevilles of this world are happy at school? Why is Neville so important? Why does every single class in the school have to be Neville friendly? Because, yes, I do think Neville gets a raw deal from being in Snape's classes and that it probably isn't the right place for him. But I got a raw deal from being in 80% of the classes I attended at school that weren't right for me. And of the minority of classes that worked for me... well, not all those teachers were Snape's (some were McGonagall's) quite a few had a bit of the Snape in them - and others an awful lot of it. I sometimes wonder - those people who are so opposed to Snape's teaching methods - what do they make of kids like me? Do they think we're unimportant? Or do they think we're delusional and utterly mistaken about what worked for us and what didn't? Joe: Sorry but I'm not really sure what your point here is Shaun: First of all, I just want to start with two little quotes - at least one of which I have shared before. This first quote comes directly from my most Snape-like teacher (a decade and a half after he taught me, I find him quite easy to talk to) when I mentioned to him that I compared him to Snape and used him as an example of how a Snape-like teacher could be a good thing. He agreed with me that he was like that, and other people had made the comparison. Later on he sent me an e-mail with further discussion of this and I asked his permission to quote this little paragraph. Joe: So he is the best eh? Does he have any documentation for that or just a inflated sense of self worth? I take it he teaches at a boys school because otherwise he just ignored a bit more than half the population. Shaun: Just a little insight into the thoughts of a self confessed Snape that I think is interesting, and shows how such a person can actually truly have the interests of their students at heart deep down. I'm not saying Snape does when he teaches - I don't know if he does. But I do know that a teacher can have all the appearances of Snape (and more) and really still have his students in mind. Joe: Sorry but I got the impression he was more interested in maintaining his perhaps self appointed title than making a real impact in people's lives. Shaun: The other quote is from the history of one of the schools I attended and concerns one of the other Snape like teachers I had at school. I will be concealing his name, simply because I don't have his permission to expose him like this, but besides that the quote is verbatim. "Another long-serving staff member was ****** ******. Many of his students regard him as the best maths teacher they ever had. 'His style of teaching was very systematic, which I thought was a good way to learn, and he made things quite interesting.' His maths results were without parallel, and he was a particularly good teacher of the brightest students. He tested the boys constantly and read out their results in class while handing back maths tests. This practice produced an extraordinary competitiveness among his students. 'He demanded the best of everyone.' ****** ****** is also remembered as a strict disciplinarian." I won't quote this book in general as I have a class to go to in a short time, and this e-mail is taking longer than I expected but there is some material in this book that I think may be very interesting in terms of why different people may see Snape differently. In some cases at least. And that is their gender. I can't demonstrate this statistically but I do have the impression that most of those who express a dislike for Snape *as a teacher* on this list are female, and most of those who express support for his teaching style as valid are male. Sax talks about how boys and girls react to different classroom management styles differently (in general - none of this is absolute) in a reasonable amount of detail. I won't go into all of this now - I can be a bit more detailed if people want - but Sax presents the idea that a confrontational, in-your-face approach to classroom management that can even involve yelling at a child works well with a lot of boys - but would be a very bad approach for most girls - who tend to respond better to a supportive, non-confrontational approach. Joe: Sorry but I am male and a former US marine. I have no problem with a hard nosed approach to learning in many cases. The major problem I have that makes me say that Snape is a terrible techer is that he has only one approach. It is his JOB to teach as many students as possible as much knowledge as possible and to do what is needed in each case. You can say he acts like he does to help educate the students of Hogwarts but if he were really concerned with every student then he would alter his methods when he found that his original ideas were not working. But he doesn't alter them to fit the particular student. What he does is totally destroy what potential exists in those that do not respond to his teaching methods. It is his JOB to adapt his method to maximize his effectiveness but he doesn't because he doesn't care. Shaun: Stress improves learning in males - but impairs it in females (again, this is a generalisation - Sax actually devotes quite a bit of time towards the end of his book looking at some reasons why the generalisations are not always true, but as generalisations they do work). The point is though - that gender may make a difference here to the way some of us are seeing Snape's teaching style. Joe: Hogwarts isn't a normal school either. It is almost a hybrid of normal school and vocational school. In it's vocational aspect Snape's JOB is to train people to be able to use Potions in certain professions and to attract students to want to consider a career in Potions. Most people aren't going to choose a career where they have grown to despise the subject. Note this isn't so much of an indictement of Snape's personality as it is his performance. He has a responsibility to try every method possible to motivate his students and yet he does not. He is a terrible teacher. Joe From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed May 17 16:26:00 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 09:26:00 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: <014501c67911$f03fb630$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> References: <014501c67911$f03fb630$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: <700201d40605170926l4b1476acy379739c0897fa468@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152363 nethwen2: > Professor Snape, on the other hand, is a VERY strict > > teacher who has exceptionally high standards. > Harry and Neville (bless him) are poor students. They do not make the > grade > and they never will - although Harry of course has extra help what with > Hermione doing his homework for him and his acquired Potion's book where > he > repeatedly cheats throughout the year. *sorry going off on a tangent > there > lol. I can't stand cheating*. Okay, so what Professor Snape does is > humiliates, and punishes weakness, nothing more. He lashes out with his > tongue. I do not think such actions warrant being brought before the > headmaster and being brought to task. > > Kim: > I have to disagree with you here. From moment one in Snape's class, > before > Harry had any chance at all to prove himself an able or poor student, > Snape > humiliated him. On many occassions his tactics of humiliating Harry and > Neville reached cruelty levels. And when Snape gives Harry zeros for > potions that are better than those made by some others in the class, he's > not just humiliating a poor student. Harry was not so poor a student that > > he was not doing work that would at least get him half credit, along with > nearly everyone else in the class. Snape gave him zeros on several > occassions that should have been given at least some credit. I don't see > him as merely humiliating a poor student and punishing weakness (which in > itself is an abhorrent thought). snip > .. . Kemper now: Does Harry feel humiliated? Does he feel he's abused? I don't think so. Some could argue that he doesn't feel that way because he's been conditioned through his upbringing to be numb to that sort of stuff. I would say he seems fairly cognisant of abuse when it's inflicted upon him by Umbridge, so he is aware what abuse looks like and, arguably, feels like. Even in the Potion Master's first class, the reader doesn't see that Harry feels humiliated. We see that he's a bit pissed maybe and that he uses humor well. We don't see Harry teary-eyed after class, jotting down victimy-notes in his feelings journal. So what we bring into our interpretation of the reading is opinion shaped by our thin or thick skinned background, where we're either eager to see the abuser to validate our victiminess or where we easily see the difference between an abuser (Umbridge) and, for lack of a better word, a dick (Snape). -Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 16:26:15 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:26:15 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152364 Carol: > All I am asking is a little understanding and compassion for Merope, > who does not fit the pattern of a rapist or even a seductress. She, > too, was a victim, and it's clear to me that what she wanted was not > sex or even necessarily marriage but love. I am afraid that certain > members of this list would have burned her at the stake if they had > discovered her "crime." (How dare a woman use power of any sort on a > man? She must be an evil seductress, no, a rapist, and a witch at > that! Send her out to die of starvation with her unborn brat! That's > the mentality I'm seeing here, and I don't think it's the view that > JKR wants us to have.) Alla: That's the problem, Carol. Rapists and abusers do NOT necessarily fit any patterns, they come in all shape and forms, IMO. This one came in the form of the woman, who was abused herself and who chose to do the same to the innocent man, whose only crime was IMO to fall under her wishful eye. Someone made a great analogy IMO that Merope never had any toys and the moment she realised that she can have one, who can "love her", she went for it and she broke it forever. The only problem is that toy had a feelings too. And, rephrasing your analogy - certainly, how dare this woman made a man an object of her will, since contrary to Pippin's argument I see no evidence in canon that victim of love potion has ANY choice in the matter, especially that such "obsession" can be distinguished from love and to be overcome. Merope did not deserve to die. Nobody deserves to die ( well, except maybe Snape), but neither did Tom deserved any misery this woman inflicted upon him. JMO, Alla From somedayalive at yahoo.com Wed May 17 04:52:13 2006 From: somedayalive at yahoo.com (Jennifer Carlson) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 04:52:13 -0000 Subject: Merope, have we seen the last of her? In-Reply-To: <20060516221035.67618.qmail@web37210.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152365 catherine higgins wrote: > It occured to me today, that Merope might actually be a ghost. We know she was very unhappy when she died (obviously), and JKR has said that happy people do not become ghosts. I don't think it would add anything to the plot of book 7, but I just wondered if she might still be around....somewhere.... and if we might see her again. < Jen: I doubt it...Merope was sick and tired of being in the world...I sincerely doubt she would have become a ghost and had to stick around even longer. JMO, of course! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 16:40:10 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:40:10 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: <20060517122349.61390.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152366 Maria8162001 wrote: What Merope did IMO is also rape and he violated TOm Sr's rights, physically and mentally. She used love potion to make Tom Sr. marry her, is that rape? IMO, YES! Why? because even in marriage without using love potion if a woman is forced by her husband to have sex with her when she doesn't want it, that is also called rape. A husband cannot forced his own wife to make love or have sex with him if she doesn't want to without calling it as rape. So how much more with a false marriage like what Merope did to Tome Sr. Carol responds: Where is the evidence that she used force or that she "used love potion to make him marry her"? All we know is that she wanted him to love her. The potion, which creates an obsession with a person may have compelled him to propose to her, take his marriage vows, and make love to his lawfully wedded wife, but there's no evidence that Merope had either sex or marriage in mind when she gave it to him. (See my other posts for more detailed arguments. I'm simply asking people to look at the canon here rather than making unfounded assumptions based on postmodern Muggle moral judgments with which Merope could not possibly be familiar.) maria8162001 wrote: > > All I could say in this is Merope is well capable of giving a better life for her son if she wanted to, but she chose not to. I do not blame Tom sr., for this I blame Merope. She should take responsibility for her action. this is what we all have to know and remember for everything we do there are consequences and we should take responsiblity for our every actions and not blame it on anybody. Carol responds: Whom is Merope blaming for her circumstances? It's Tom Sr. who claims that he's been "hoodwinked." Merope does take responsibility for her actions by telling him that she's a witch and has been giving him a love potion. Her reward for her honesty is to be abandoned in London, penniless and pregnant. Merope has been brought up in filth and poverty by a man who does not even have a job and has provided her with no training in eithics or social skills. There is no evidence that any of the Gaunts attended Hogwarts or can even read. She clearly has not found a way to earn a living or she would not have been forced to sell the locket for a tiny fraction of its worth (or so easily duped into accepting a mere ten galleons for a priceless artifact). She is ragged and starving, and not merely because she has either lost her powers or refusing to use them. You cannot conjure money or food even if you're a witch. She has no means of earning a living, and Tom Sr. knows that. He has seen her hovel and her father and her madman brother. His fear that his child may turn out like them does not justify neglect of his parental responsibilities, regardless of the circumstances under which the child was conceived. Merope, of course, shares that responsibility. The problem is that she must bear the burden of pregnancy with no resources. She is frightened, desperate, and demoralized. Tom, however angry and humiliated he may be, does not have to carry the child or give birth to it. He merely needs to provide for its welfare so that it won't be born in the street or taken to an orphanage. However he may feel about Merope, he is the child's father and is as responsible as she is for its welfare, both morally and legally, and in a much better position to do something about it. Carol, again wondering why so few posters have any compassion for the abused, neglected, ignorant, and traumatized Merope From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 17 17:01:56 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:01:56 -0000 Subject: Ginny's Behavior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152367 > Ceridwen: > I'm not sure which you want canon for - the ages of the Weasley > children? Ginny's adoration for Bill? Or for the criticism by > a 'snot-nosed fifteen year old sib who adores him and probably > doesn't want him to marry *anybody* who will take him away from her, > which pretty much means anybody at all'? > > I saw Fleur as fighting back against a tide of dislike from her > fiance's mother and sister, not as being the agressor in the > criticism war. It hadn't gotten to the most horrible point during > the summer, but by Christmas, it was out of control. So when Fleur > called Molly on her unfounded assumption in the hospital wing in HBP > (US Scholastic hardcover pg 623) I was not at all surprised. She had > been fighting that attitude from Molly and Ginny the whole year, and > between the stress of the year and the stress of the moment, she most > definitely told them off: > > "You thought I would not weesh to marry him? Or per'aps, you > hoped?" said Fleur, her nostrils flaring. > > I completely saw where she got the idea that Molly didn't like her > and *hoped* she would forget about Bill. And on page 622, Ginny's > eyes narrow slightly as she watches Fleur with Bill. Eyes usually > only narrow in dislike, absent bright light. One way people try to > drive away an unwanted person is by treating them shabbily. I > thought Molly and Ginny treated Fleur very shabbily. Magpie: Absolutely. What's going on in those scenes is far more subtle than just Fleur being self-centered and completely insufferable while the three women in the house have to suffer it. It's very consistent that Ginny and Molly are clearly not happy with Fleur (and Hermione's jealous of her effect on Ron), and this seems to be more about the wedding than anything else. Even Harry doesn't agree with their reaction to Fleur and then figures out that he'd better not stick up for her around the girls. Ginny tells us right off, "Mum hates her," and Molly claims she doesn't hate her, just thinks they're rushing the wedding--iow, she doesn't want her marrying Bill. It's pretty consistent--the first we hear about the wedding is Fleur expecting Harry to know about it and looking "reproachfully" at Mrs. Weasley, who says she hasn't gotten around to telling Harry about the wedding, unlike, oh, the details of Arthur's promotion, the success of the Twins' shop, how much Ron has grown...she tells him Hermione's there, but not Fleur. Because she doesn't want the wedding happening, she doesn't talk about it. From a kids' pov Fleur may be sounding self-centered and boring talking about a wedding, but actually, the way all of the women go silent and awkward whenever wedding stuff comes up is a clear signal of their disapproval. Not to get too into rigid sex roles here, but Fleur is staying in their house because she is marrying their son. The wedding is supposed to be a family occasion, only they're not treating it that way. As the women, traditionally, they're expected to show a minimal interest. Molly's the mother of the groom, Ginny's a bridesmaid--guaranteed if this were Ron and Hermione or Harry and Ginny's wedding they would be showing tons of interest and probably we'd hear how they're gabbing all day about dresses etc. Sure women can get bored with wedding talk too, but Fleur's not talking about the wedding very much at all--and Molly and Ginny never do. Whenever the wedding is brought up by Fleur there's no positive reaction. It's not rude of her to say that she thinks Ginny and her sister will look great in gold and that Ginny would look horrible in pink--if she were being a bitch she'd make sure the dresses were pink so Gabrielle would look pretty and Ginny would look bad. It's not like Ginny's overly sensitive about the fact that red headed coloring requires flattering shades of clothing. The fact that everyone acts as if Fleur's wedding talk is boring, intrusive, and imposing on the family (with every sign that they've never mustered a positive, supportive or enthusiastic response to her because they're all so against her marrying Bill) is far more than just finding Fleur herself conceited. It's disapproving of the wedding. That first moment is the most important--Harry has arrived at the Weasley home the night before and Mrs. Weasley gave him a rundown on what's going on with the family. Yet the next day he's like, "What's Fleur Delacour doing here?" Molly doesn't include an upcoming wedding in the family news? And then Ginny reveals that the news is more that Molly hates Fleur than that there's a wedding happening. Molly looks bad-tempered and seems to, as Ginny says, dislike being alone with Fleur. That's what makes the situation so hostile, as opposed to just good-natured laughter at Fleur's OTT Frenchy stereotype-ness. As stereotypical one might find Fleur's story in the books JKR seems to always make it clear that the worst thing about her is her effect on men, particularly certain men. -m From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 17 17:14:23 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:14:23 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152368 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > And, rephrasing your analogy - certainly, how dare this woman made a > man an object of her will, since contrary to Pippin's argument I see > no evidence in canon that victim of love potion has ANY choice in the > matter, especially that such "obsession" can be distinguished from > love and to be overcome. Pippin: I agree that if a love potion makes a person unable to refuse a sexual advance, it could be called a rape drug. But where is the canon for this assertion? It seems a circular argument to say that Tom made love to a woman he wouldn't have wanted if he hadn't taken the love potion, and therefore the love potion not only made him want her but made him have sex. It sounds like an echo of the sexist notion that men have no control over their sex drives and are at the mercy of any woman who entices them. Nor do I see that it's necessary to explain why Tom married Merope. I can believe that Tom, who is arrogant in our brief glimpse of him and characterized as snobbish and rude by the villagers, would ignore anything he had ever been told about giving into obsessions and any advice that he should wait before taking such a serious step, without any help from a potion. He was used to taking what he wanted. Let me ask this, Alla. If love potions produce an illusion of love so perfect that the victim cannot tell the difference between that and the real thing, how can Slughorn state so confidently that love potions do not produce love? Wouldn't he say instead that they produce a love that lasts only as long as the potion does? What do you think is the basis of Slughorn's statement? Do you think it is false? Pippin From oppen at mycns.net Wed May 17 17:23:45 2006 From: oppen at mycns.net (ericoppen) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:23:45 -0000 Subject: Tom, Merope and the Love Potion of Doom Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152369 I have posted here before that Merope Gaunt reminds me of the equally-tragic Mayella Ewell, in _To Kill a Mockingbird._ Like Mayella, who is so desperate for affection as to make a pass at a black man while still considering herself far above blacks due to her white skin, Merope is willing to do anything at all for some love in her life, but still does not really see her target (Tom Riddle, Sr.) as human or an equal who has feelings and rights. And, like Mayella Ewell, Merope's actions set a train of tragedy in motion. While I feel that Merope is culpable for her behavior, I pity her deeply, and were I on the bench for _R. vs. Gaunt,_ I'd go as easily on her as I could, but I'd still want to make _very_ sure that she couldn't harm another Muggle. And I think even Rumpole Of The Bailey would agree with me on that point---she's guilty (of serious misuse of her magical talents, at the least; I don't know how WW law works so I don't know if charges of assault or rape could be brought) and should be prevented from doing further harm, but not punished harshly. Now, if I had Morfin or (especially!) Marvolo before the bench...*hideous sadistic grin* One thing that AFAICT hasn't been brought up before is that Merope's love potion may well have had nasty side-effects, which affected TR Sr.'s behavior even after he stopped being dosed with the stuff. Long-term drug abuse leaves damage behind even after the drug use stops, and I don't doubt that the same thing could be true with love potions. Also---where did she _get_ a love potion? She's as poor as the proverbial ecclesiastical rodent, so I would expect she had to whip it up herself, and, somehow, I don't see her as ever having been any threat to Snape as Top Dog in Potions-Making. She could have damaged TR, Sr. badly just by ineptitude. Think about it. If _you_ were a wizard or witch, would you trust Merope Gaunt to make a potion you needed to take? I sure wouldn't! I'd sooner trust Neville Longbottom and Nymphadora Tonks to handle nitroglycerine! From inufan_625 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 11:57:25 2006 From: inufan_625 at yahoo.com (inufan_625) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 11:57:25 -0000 Subject: Ginny's Behavior/Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152370 Phoenixgod: Oh, well that makes it okay then. 'Cause what we want to encourage is more teenagers taken things into their own hands and showing no consequences or punishments as a result of their actions. Inufan_625: Just because we don't see Ginny being punished doesn't mean it never happens, and yes sometimes you should encourage your children to stand up for themselves, not necessarily physically but at least vocally. We also know that Ginny expected Slughorn to punish her for cursng Zacharias. It isn't her fault that he chooses not to and it is possibly that the `irate' looking McGonagall from the quidditch pitch assigns Ginny a punishment outside of Harry's hearing or vision. Phoenixgod: Pesky opinions you aren't allowed to have. Regardless of whether he was right or wrong, he is allowed to have an opinion and not be assaulted for it. And for me, my problem with the scene isn't so much that it happens, but that we are supposed to like it and see it as something cool and spunky instead of the bullyish action it actually was--the second piece of bullying we saw directed at Zack Smith by Ginny. Inufan_625: Actually Smith can think whatever he wants, but as it has been stated previously he should not have stated those opinions when he was supposed to be providing commentary on the game. Could Ginny have handled the situation better, yes, but that doesn't distract from the fact that he insulted her, her family, and her team in front of the whole school. She acted rashly and lost her temper. Everyone in the books has done that, so why is Ginny hated for it where others are revered. (I.e. Hermione slapping Draco...) Phoenixgod: Yes, it can't possibly be petty jealousy over a preturnaturally beautiful woman going at her big brother and stealing him away from the only girl of the family. Ginny doesn't have nasty feelings like that. She is above those sorts of things. Honestly the most insulting thing about Fleur/Ginny bit is that once again we are supposed to see the Phlegm nickname as funny. And it isn't. Its stupid. The twins are funny. Ron is funny. Harry is funny. Dumbledore is funny. Luna is funny. JKR can write funny. Ginny is not funny. Inufan_625: Harry finds Ginny funny. There are many occasions in the book where he laughs at her jokes and they share private looks of amusement. Yes her humor can be a bit unkind, but so can Ron's and Harry's. They share the same dark sense of humor, which Harry used as a survival mechanism his whole life. It gives them further common ground. What I find insulting is Fleur's attitude towards her soon to be family and their way of life. Her making fun of Mrs. Weasley's favorite music and acting so put out for having to listen to it for a little while is just as out of bounds as Ginny calling her names, and let us not forget that both Hermione and Mrs. Weasley act much the same towards the part veela. While I can concede that a bit of Ginny and her mother's distaste for Bill's soon to be bride stems from the feeling that they are losing a brother/son it is also her attitude that irks them. No one claims Ginny to be above petty feelings or nasty things, merely that they are natural feelings for a 15 year old girl. I also found Phlegm to be a stupid nickname though... Phoenixgod: We know that Luna says that. We also never see it happen. We do however see Ginny call Luna Loony when she isn't around. The only people we see stick up for Luna is Harry and Ron. Once again, Ginny is all talk and no follow through--a repeating problem in HBP and OOTP. Inufan_625: Why would Luna lie about Ginny sticking up for her and getting people to stop calling her Loony. Luna says it because it is true and again all of the gang call her Loony at least once and yet it is Ginny who gets castigated for it. Phoenixgod: We hear litanies about Ginny's power and mastery of cursing but we never see either in action and she is in fact dropped pretty fast during the minstry action. We hear about how funny she is and she does nothing that makes me laugh in the entire book. We hear how she is a great friend to Luna and we don't see a single example of that. Ginny, and by extension, JKR, who is always talking her up, is trying way too hard. We don't need any interviews telling us how fantasic a wizard DD is. He oozes his might in every scene, from the quiet to the comical to the battles. We shouldn't have to get interviews explaining why she is so powerful and perfect for Harry. It should be obvious on the page. And it isn't. And for a not insignificant part of the fandom, Ginny isn't even all that likeable--let alone Harry's equal. Inufan_625: Everyone but Neville and Harry are dropped fast at the DOM and of the group a broken ankle seems a bit insignificant to a nearly fatal chest wound and nearly being choked to death by brains, and it is not made clear whether or not Luna's reductor curse played a part in Ginny's injury. Everyone has their own sense of humor and I did find several things Ginny says and does funny in the book. You did not and that's just a difference in humor, neither of us are alone in that. JKR tells us Ginny is powerful and she is the author so I chose to believe her. Ginny has really only just come into her own in the books and I am sure that we will see some of this power in book 7. After all Slughorn would not have invited her to the Slug Club if he didn't see potential in her to be a great witch from her hex work and he would know. I don't see why people can so easily dismiss JKR's words. Phoenixgod: How many instances in the book can you name where we saw Ginny stick up for the little guy, or fought a bad guy to protect someone weaker than herself? Not heard about second hand from a character or through an authors interview, but actually saw it in the books? I can think of exactly one in six books. Inufan_625: You cannot discount Luna telling Harry that Ginny stuck up for her just because it happened off page. Luna mentions it because JKR wants the readers to know that it happened. It is canon. Luna would have no reason to lie about this. She also sticks up for Neville, with himself, but does it none the less. "You're not nobody" Regardless as to whether or not Sirius was in danger she went to the DOM with the intent of helping him and fighting the bad guys holding him. Phoenixgod: Harry has more instrument of Justice in an eyelash than Ginny has ever displayed. She's too busy being petty and mean. Inufan_625: Petty and mean? I don't see it. Rash and temperamental, definitely. Phoenixgod: Yes, and if my sister had used the ammo on me that Ginny used on Ron, I would have done far worse than he does. Ginny was LOW in that scene. Inufan_625: If I called my sister out in front of a room full of people or in front of my long time crush I would expect her to do no less than Ginny. Ron implying Ginny was a slut for going out with ONE guy A YEAR was low in my opinion and they were both at fault for trying to hurt each other. Ron could have and should have been far more tactful. I am the oldest of five and I would have had a huge head to head with any of my siblings for acting like either Ron or Ginny towards me. It wouldn't have been right or pretty but it would have been real life. Betsy Hp: Ron had every right. He's her older brother, and she was putting herself into a position to earn those sort of nicknames. It was his duty as the elder sibling to call her on her behavior. Making out with one of those boyfriends in a public, and popularly traveled hallway. Inufan_625: First of all Ron is Ginny's brother and not her father. Yes, he should look out for her but he doesn't own her nor does he have any right to boss her around. Siblings are not responsible for disciplining their younger brothers and sisters, that is the parents job alone. Ron handled the situation poorly and Ginny did in kind. They were both wrong but neither was worse than the other. You all seem to forget that the corridor was "deserted" before Ron and Harry came along and she was in a shortcut behind a tapestry, not exactly a high traffic area. Betsy Hp: I went to highschool with one of my younger sisters and I would have called her on that sort of behavior too. It's what older siblings do. And, quite frankly, it's what parents expect older sibling to do. Gerry: Besides, the idea that elder brothers are somehow responsible and justified to control their younger sibblings behaviour is reprehensible. Well, if I would have had an older brother like Ron I would have treated him much worse than Ginny. He was awful, patriarchal, and behaving like he belonged in the Victorian age. He needed his comeuppance and needed it badly. Inufan_625: Well said, Gerry. I reiterate, yes, older sibs should watch out for younger sibs but not stifle them and try to control them. I am the oldest but I never would have dreamed of calling any of my younger siblings out in such a way. It is one thing to guide and to lead by example and quite another to try and parent. If Ron really thought Ginny was such a problem why didn't he write to their mother? It troubles me that you who agree with Ron think it is acceptable for an older sibling to govern the life of a younger one and to insinuate that said sister is slut for dating two guys in two years. Ron was out of line and I stand by that, just as I stand by the fact that Ginny was wrong to strike out at him in anger with the snogging comments, but again that is typical teenage behavior and not in itself a basis to judge one character worse than another. Gerry: The only person who had issues was Ron himself, which had a lot more to do with him not being popular with the girls. Betsy Hp: Where on earth do you get that idea? Ron isn't experienced, true. But he's got Lavander giggling and whispering with her friends when he walks by. That suggests that he's seen as a bit of stud. He just hasn't bothered to take advantage of that fact. Yet. Inufan_625: Ron a bit of a stud because one girl is giggling over him??? He certainly wasn't a stud at the Yule ball when his date didn't get a single dance. Harry had far more girls giggling over him in HBP. Lavender isn't the measure of all female opinion at Hogwarts. Gerry: And it was all over when he finally had his own girlfriend. We don't find Ron mentioning Ginny having extensive snogging sessions in the common room, yet guess who does... Betsy Hp: And that's because Ron doesn't have any older siblings of his own at Hogwarts anymore. But yeah, Ron was hypocritical there. Though I'm betting he'd have *still* said something if Ginny and Dean started making out in the common room. Not fair, but that's life. Inufan_625: So it's okay for Ron to be a hypocrite and yet it's wrong from Ginny to rail against his hypocracy??? I think not. Life may not be fair but Ginny has every right to be upset by such a blatant double standard. Are you honestly saying that Ginny should be meek and timid and go along with it because life's not fair? Change is spurned by those who stand up in the face of injustice. Granted her methods are not always the best but at least she isn't content to let herself be held back by such BS. Betsy Hp: Boys think she's pretty, but that's about all we see as far as Ginny being popular. As for likable, I guess she could be, once she gets that massive chip off her shoulder. At the moment she's a bit too likely to throw a punch (or a hex) to be called likable. I'd say the only reason we're supposed to think Ginny is this wonderful girl is based on JKR's interviews. There's little in the actual canon to say that she's wonderful. But there's a lot to show that she's got some major issues that need to be dealt with. Again, every time Ginny unleashes she hurts the people she loves. That makes it hard for me to believe that her anger, her temper, are a good thing. Inufan_625: You want to talk about someone with issues and a chip on their shoulder take a look at our hero. He could build a house with all the stone on his shoulder and he has more issues than I can count. This is a book about teenagers and teenagers have issues, as do adult for that matter. It is simply that MOST times adults can conceal them better. There isn't a person alive who has never lashed out and hurt someone they care for, most especially not a moody fifteen year old someone. Don't like Ginny if you don't want to, but don't castigate her for being real to life. OotP Harry also known as capslock Harry was far more irritating to me than Ginny has ever been even at her most temperamental. We have seen all the characters throw hexes and punches, even Hermione. It is hypocritical to hate one character for doing no less than all the others have done if you don't begrudge them their actions as well. Ceridwen: Ron, as her brother, will be more critical of her than anyone else. His underlying concern will also be more personal than another person's - the WW seems like a conservative society where things like this is concerned; he is trying to protect her reputation. True, he did it poorly. But, as you imply yourself, siblings have a special relationship. They will yell when they really only care. [snip] Oh who Bill decides to marry, Ginny has no business butting in. BAW: Hold up a moment! It is OK for a brother to object to whom his sister dates, but a sister must accept whom a brother hooks up with? Surely you can't mean anything so sexist. But, if not, what DO you mean? Inufan_625: I second that BAW. If it isn't Ginny's business who will be taking up residence as a part of her family then it shouldn't be her brothers' business who she chooses. The boys are allowed their brotherly concern. Why can't Ginny be allowed to be concerned that her brother may end up unhappy in the future if he marries the wrong woman. Also I don't ever recall her saying anything to Bill's face about his choice, which means that she hasn't technically butted in at all. Yb's turn now: I've noticed a lot of people getting hung up on this - but there is a difference in the situations. In fact a bit of a handful. 1) Ron is Ginny's older brother. He is expected to look out for her, most of his family probably expects him to. Fred and George do the same - I would imagine Percy would if he was nearby. Ginny, on the other hand, is Bill's baby sister - she isn't expected to 'look after him'. Inufan_625 Actually I would hope all my children will continue to look after each other not just the older ones looking after the younger. If my eldest daughter gets into the car of a stranger should my younger one look the other way because she is younger or should she speak up and if necessary run home and tell me? Ceridwen: When the sister is fifteen and the youngest, can you doubt that the elder sib will yell, scream and holler at her behavior? And can you imagine a fifteen year old butting into your presumably adult love life? Inufan_625: As far as I can tell Ginny never butted into Bill's love life. She kept her dislike of Fleur behind his back most likely so that she wouldn't alienate him or look like she was forcing him to choose between her and his fianc?, just as Molly who is a bit more obvious seems to be doing. Ceridwen: Younger sib makes a spectacle of herself, elder sib objects strenuously at finding younger sib in a clinch in the middle of the shortcut to Gryffindor Tower. Ron handles it differently than the twins would have, but I'll bet that if they found him snogging in the same circumstances in his fifth year (their seventh), they would have crawled all over him like lice on scalp. Inufan_625: In a shortcut snogging as opposed to in the middle of the common room. In a deserted corridor behind a tapestry is hardly what I would call making a spectacle of herself. I also bet that if the twins had found little Ronikins snogging a girl in the same place as Ginny that he would have upped himself a notch on their respect meter. Do you honestly see the twins as the type to disapprove of their 15-16 year old brother snogging a girl, with their total disregard for rules??? Ceridwen: Conversely, we have elder adult sibling who is around twenty- five years old, on his own, earning a living, dating the same girl for a year (OotP evidence, ), engaged to the girl he's been seeing for that year, being criticized by a snot-nosed fifteen year old sib who adores him and probably doesn't want him to marry *anybody* who will take him away from her, which pretty much means anybody at all. Gerry: Canon for that please. What I saw and have already backed up with canon is a very stuck up, egocentric and vain guest who looks down on their home and who is going to be family. No wonder Mrs. Weasley, Ginny and the twins don't like that and it is also clear Ron is still a bit taken with her. This also obviously is part of why Hermione does not like her, but it is also for a great part due to Fleur being 'so full of herself.' Yes, calling her Phlegm is typically teenage behaviour but it is clear that the reason is the way Fleur is acting, Inufan_625: I would also like to add that Ginny didn't seem at all opposed to Bill marrying Tonks, which kind of negates the whole no one taking away her brother accusation. Make no mistake it is Fleur's attitude that draws her ire not the fact that Bill wants to marry her. Ceridwen: Adults can do things kids can't. Adults can sign contracts. Adults can be tried on their own merit in a court of law. Adults must take responsibility for their actions without having Mummy and Daddy charged by implication. Adults are not kids. Adults will have the benefits as well as the responsibilities of age. Bill is an adult. Bill is engaged. Bill is his own man and not even subject to his parents' will and whim. Inufan_625: And adults by their status also tend to make larger and more detrimental mistakes. Being older does not always mean smarter. Might I point out that most of the adults in HP have also not been able to do what a child has done... Face down Voldemort. Bill does have the right to be with and marry whomever he wants, but his family also has the right to be concerned about his choice. They want him to be happy and they did not think Fleur could make him happy, but I also never saw anyone tell him they didn't like his fianc? or not to marry her. Ceridwen: Ginny is still a child. Her parents ultimately have to pick up her slack. Her family will be at the least shamed and looked at askance for her misdeeds. This is the way of things with children. Elder sibs babysit/child mind younger sibs, elder sibs remind younger sibs how to act, even if the elder sibs make exceptions for themselves unfairly. Elder sibs are held accountable by parents when the elder sib is the only one present while the younger sib is making a spectacle of herself/himself. You can choose to see it as a sexist issue if you like, but you're purposely missing everything else that goes along with being the youngest of seven as opposed to the eldest of seven. And I would love to see your reaction to your younger sib trying to dictate your adult love life no matter what sex that sib happens to be. Inufan_625: Ginny may be young and not of the age of majority but she is not exactly a child either. All the children in Hp are asked to grow up far too quickly. They are living amidst a war for their future and the ultimate hero of that war is deeply ingrained in their hearts. People are dying all around them. Yes, Ginny has some growing up to do still, they all do but it is not like she is still in nappies and not responsible for herself. Yes she still needs some guidance but no one has to hold her hand. In a little over a year she will be considered a full adult and her choices are starting to be seen as entirely her own. Also while older sibs are expected to look out for younger sibs that doesn't make them accountable for the younger actions. In the end that falls to the parents. If I leave my four year old and my one year old out side by the pool and the baby falls in, who is to blame, my child or me for being an irresponsible parent. Or if one was 10 and the other 6... Where do we draw the line for responsibility of older sibs??? I have four younger siblings and I would hope that they would care enough about me to want to see me happy. If one of them had serious reservations about a part of my life I would want them to tell me, not in the way Ginny acted behind Bill's back but in a reasonable way. I would respect them enough to listen even if I didn't agree and then try and explain to them my feelings as well. It would be far worse to let things fester and cause a rift in the family. That would be the adult way to handle things. I happen to be roughly Bill's age and my youngest sib is about the twin's ages. From oppen at mycns.net Wed May 17 17:29:01 2006 From: oppen at mycns.net (ericoppen) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:29:01 -0000 Subject: Fleur and the Weasley women Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152371 While I agree that Fleur Delacour could have been a lot more polite when we saw her _chez_ Weasley, I think there'd have been a lot of friction even if she was as sweet as could be and the second coming of Melanie Wilkes (from _Gone with the Wind._) Molly Weasley is used to being _the_ Alpha Female in that little pack, and does not care much for competition. And Fleur, being part-veela, can't help but make guys go slightly gaga, which had to irritate Molly (and Ginny). I shouldn't be a bit surprised to find out that part-veela women often have a lot of trouble getting along with "normal" magical women, merely because their "attraction" creates a great deal of resentment among the more normal witches. They'd see it as unfair competition, and would resent the part-veela no matter what she did. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 17:33:28 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:33:28 -0000 Subject: Request for new topics Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152372 Lately most of the posts on this list have involved attacking or at least passing judgment on certain characters, primarily Merope and other female characters (and, of course, Snape and Dumbledore). Rather than imposing our own standards of behavior and morality on people who have no way of knowing what postmodern Muggles think is right or wrong and probably would not care if they did know, or arguing about which is worse, Ginny's immature hostility to Fleur or Fleur's tactless indifference to the family's tastes in food and music, can we try to come up with some new ideas that actually help us find meaning in the books? Not Horcruxes, please, unless someone can find something new to say about them. I could talk about foreshadowing and narrative technique, but I'd probably put everyone to sleep. Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own lives and social views? BTW, does anyone besides me think that Ron's remark in HBP about Draco's Hand of Glory is a Flint? Draco (or rather Lucius) didn't buy the Hand of Glory in CoS, just at the point when Lucius was selling Dark artifacts because he was anticipating a Ministry raid. How could Ron know that Draco had the Hand of Glory, and when could Draco have bought it? Is it the thing he didn't want to be seen carrying down the street? If so, Ron is wrong that he already had it. Carol, hoping for a cessation of hostilities and fresh ideas in what used to be an enjoyable forum From friartuck97 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 13:14:31 2006 From: friartuck97 at yahoo.com (FriarTuck97) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 06:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Why Lily could have saved herself In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060517131432.51753.qmail@web61012.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152373 Goddlefrood wrote: I am firmly of the view that JKR would not have placed as much emphasis as she has on Lily's gifts as a potioneer unless they were to play an important role in book 7. It is a part of the history of the wizarding world that Lily is deceased, but it has also been declared, by Voldemort himself, that Lily needn't have died. There is a plausible explanation for this, which runs something like this: Harry discovers that the reason Lily might have been spared was that she had discovered some powerful potion that no one (apart from perhaps Snape) is aware of and which has qualities that would finish off the evil that men do or strip a wizard of his powers perhaps. Only she was capable of making it thus explaining why Voldemort was prepared to spare her life, but she refused to co-operate, as we know, and was, therefore, killed. The secret potion then went with her to her grave. FT: Goddlefrood, I must give it up...that is a wonderful word you have created..."Potioneer!" I rather like that! The problem with Potions is the sheer number of them; like spells, there are always new ones to be introduced to, so I agree that there will be something to her skills in Book 7. One other thing about that night... Hagrid makes a throwaway comment about seeing Sirius near the rubble of the Potter's house...perhaps the AK which bounced off Harry and knocked the hell out of LV kept rebounding until it destroyed the house...mere speculation, but I cannot follow "Potioneer..." Once again, great word! -FT From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 17 17:45:06 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:45:06 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152374 > Pippin: > I agree that if a love potion makes a person unable to refuse a sexual > advance, it could be called a rape drug. But where is the canon for this > assertion? It seems a circular argument to say that Tom made love > to a woman he wouldn't have wanted if he hadn't taken the love potion, > and therefore the love potion not only made him want her but made him > have sex. It sounds like an echo of the sexist notion that men > have no control over their sex drives and are at the mercy of any woman > who entices them. > > Nor do I see that it's necessary to explain why Tom married Merope. > > I can believe that Tom, who is arrogant in our brief glimpse of him and > characterized as snobbish and rude by the villagers, would ignore anything > he had ever been told about giving into obsessions and any advice that > he should wait before taking such a serious step, without any help from > a potion. He was used to taking what he wanted. Magpie: I think that's why it's being compared to rape--there's nothing *wrong* with Tom acting on what he thinks is love but is only artificial obsession. His body, his physical feelings, are tampered with so he no longer has all the facilities with which he usually makes decisions. Whether or not he should have realized that he wasn't really in love but only obsessed, where is he behaving badly towards her? Once the potion takes effect all his interest goes towards Merope and not Cecelia, so it's not like that would be a happy marriage between him and Cecelia. Dropping the one girl and marrying the other doesn't seem a bad thing to do. Apparently a Tom who thinks he's in love, or a Tom who's obsessed with a girl, would marry the girl even if his family told him she wasn't appropriate. If the love potion isn't controlling his feelings but only giving him feelings that he is acting on in his own way, he can't be described as being only driven by money and social position because he just married Merope Gaunt because she's the girl he wanted. That's why it seems like such a cruel joke to blame Tom for not acting against his feelings. If he had become obsessed with Merope and killed her or assaulted her then at least he's going outside the law, but instead he seems to be perfectly honorable in asking her to marry her--a proposal she seems to accept happily. When the potion wears off and the love he felt feels--accurately--as if it was not something that was part of himself, he leaves her. Tom does appear to instinctively understand on some level what was done to him, even if no one else will believe it. Yet he doesn't do anything to Merope. He doesn't kill her or abuse her that we hear, he just leaves her. I think that's part of what's so painful about the whole thing for Merope, that all that really happens is that she creates an illusion of something she really wants, and when she stops creating it herself it disappears. She doesn't seem to be disillusioned about Tom, really. I mean, it's not like she marries him and he turns out to be a jerk that *she* doesn't want. When the potion wears off she seems to be simply left with the same problem she started with, that he doesn't love her. Nobody loves her (the baby might have, but we'll never know). She's also pregnant, but it doesn't seem to be shame associated with a legitimate pregnancy or an inability to care for the child that does her in. It's the loss of the love she never had, it seems to me. -m From celizwh at intergate.com Wed May 17 17:51:30 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:51:30 -0000 Subject: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152375 Shaun Hately > > The point is though - that gender may make a > > difference here to the way some of us are seeing > > Snape's teaching style. Tonks: > Thank you Shaun for that very insightful and informative > post. I think you have hit the nail on the head here. > I am female and defend Snape, but that is because I am > putting myself in his place. If he were my teacher when > I was a child, I would have been Neville. As I child I > needed a warm, loving nurturing teacher. houyhnhnm: I think class expectations and age both play a part, too. I went to working class elementary schools, then I was in the honors program in high school with a lot of kids from the other side of the tracks. The teachers I had for honors classes were all very confrontational and demanding. They were all either Snapes or McGonagalls. You could be ripped apart in front the whole class for turning in mediocre work. The conclusion from my own experience is that "socialization" (=compliance) is the expectation for working class and low income kids (and for females!) Academic excellence is only expected from rich kids (because they have to get into good universities). And too often, in math and science, only from males. Academic excellence requires tough, demanding teachers. So here's where I tie it to canon. Snape, obviously, expects the highest level of excellence from all his students and his teaching style is appropriate to his expectations. Umbridge wants to produce compliant citizens for a bureaucracy and her methods are those of brute force discipline to "break" students and boring seatwork to reduce eveyone to the lowest common intellectual denominator. Perhaps there are Hogwarts teachers whose aim is only to produce happy well-adjusted WW citizens who are "nice" and therefore reward "nice" behavior while discouraging academic ambition. I would also like to point out that none of the students at Hogwarts are "children" in terms of their stage of intellectual development. Even the first years, at 11 years of age, are already in early adolescence and, therefore, transitional between concrete and formal thinking (assuming they are like Muggles in their intellectual development which I think is a reasonable assumption. If anything I would expect Wizard children to be a little on the precocious side). From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Wed May 17 18:43:42 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 18:43:42 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152376 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > Where is the evidence that she used force or that she "used love > potion to make him marry her"? All we know is that she wanted him to > love her. The potion, which creates an obsession with a person may > have compelled him to propose to her, take his marriage vows, and make > love to his lawfully wedded wife, but there's no evidence that Merope > had either sex or marriage in mind when she gave it to him. Well, she could have said no. She was under no compulsion and new exactly what was going on. Yet they were married. Besides, you ignore that it is not canon that she gave him a love potion. It is DD's idea that she used this option to compell him because to her it would have been more romantic than Imperius. So it is equally possible she used Imperius as somebody already pointed out. (See my > other posts for more detailed arguments. I'm simply asking people to > look at the canon here rather than making unfounded assumptions based > on postmodern Muggle moral judgments with which Merope could not > possibly be familiar.) Well, even in the WW both parties have to give consent when they want to get married. If Tom had been in his right mind he would never have given consent, nothing postmodern or Muggle there. To quote some canon: 'Can you not think of any measure Merope could have taken to make Tom Riddle forget his Muggle companion and fall in love wit her instead?' HBP Bloomsbury Hardcover edtion p. 201 Seems pretty clear cut to me. > Carol responds: > Whom is Merope blaming for her circumstances? It's Tom Sr. who claims > that he's been "hoodwinked." Well, what could he have said? That he was enchanted by an evil witch? Merope does take responsibility for her > actions by telling him that she's a witch and has been giving him a > love potion. Her reward for her honesty is to be abandoned in London, > penniless and pregnant. We don't know that. This is all guesswork from DD. We know he got out and she was left. And I don't see why his running away should somehow have been wrong. > You cannot conjure money or food even if you're a witch. She has > no means of earning a living, and Tom Sr. knows that. First, how should he? Second, thats is her problem. He was in fact kidnapped and raped by her. He was USED. He has seen her > hovel and her father and her madman brother. His fear that his child > may turn out like them does not justify neglect of his parental > responsibilities, regardless of the circumstances under which the > child was conceived. I don't see him having any parental responsibilities at all actually. If a woman is raped and gets pregnant and cannot get an abortion I don't see she has any parental responsibilities either. Why not: because in both cases the person does not want a child, even stronger, would have given anything not to have gotten one. I read an article over the Bosnion war once that said this was one of the huge problems they had. There were a lot of women who were raped by Servian soldiers and had gotten pregnant and a substantial number of them hated their babies and wanted nothing to do with them at all. To say the victim is responsible? No I don't agree at all. Merope, of course, shares that responsibility. > The problem is that she must bear the burden of pregnancy with no > resources. She is frightened, desperate, and demoralized. Tom, however > angry and humiliated he may be, does not have to carry the child or > give birth to it. He merely needs to provide for its welfare so that > it won't be born in the street or taken to an orphanage. However he > may feel about Merope, he is the child's father and is as responsible > as she is for its welfare, both morally and legally, and in a much > better position to do something about it. Legally he is because of the forced marriage. But morally not at all. He is not so much the father as the forced deliverer of the sperm. Merope did all of this to herself. Now I do agree that she probably had no idea things would turn out like this, that her intentions were not evil. But her actions were. > > Carol, again wondering why so few posters have any compassion for the > abused, neglected, ignorant, and traumatized Merope > I have lots of compassion for her, but that does not make her actions anything less than criminal. She quite probably was not able to understand the horror of what she did, because of her upbringing. Yes, she needed help, needed it badly. But that was not the obligation of her victim. Gerry From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 17 19:19:38 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 19:19:38 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152377 > Magpie: > I think that's why it's being compared to rape--there's nothing > *wrong* with Tom acting on what he thinks is love but is only > artificial obsession. His body, his physical feelings, are tampered > with so he no longer has all the facilities with which he usually > makes decisions. Whether or not he should have realized that he > wasn't really in love but only obsessed, where is he behaving badly > towards her? Pippin: I guess that's where we disagree -- there *is* something wrong with acting on what you think is love but is really artificial obsession. Let's remember that it doesn't take magic --there are whole industries in the real world dedicated to inducing obsessions. Every day, movie stars get thousands of marriage proposals from people they've never met. Famous criminals get them too. If the obsessed person were accepted, I don't think they could ignore their responsibility for their spouse or their child simply on the grounds that they couldn't resist the hype. Pippin From iam.kemper at gmail.com Wed May 17 19:43:03 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 12:43:03 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Request for new topics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40605171243j3c658c96j264a6debd92b32d4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152378 On 5/17/06, justcarol67 wrote: > > Lately most of the posts on this list have involved attacking or at > least passing judgment on certain characters, primarily Merope and > other female characters (and, of course, Snape and Dumbledore). Rather > than imposing our own standards of behavior and morality on people who > have no way of knowing what postmodern Muggles think is right or wrong > and probably would not care if they did know, or arguing about which > is worse, Ginny's immature hostility to Fleur or Fleur's tactless > indifference to the family's tastes in food and music, can we try to > come up with some new ideas that actually help us find meaning in the > books? Not Horcruxes, please, unless someone can find something new to > say about them. I could talk about foreshadowing and narrative > technique, but I'd probably put everyone to sleep. > > Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and > immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own > lives and social views? > .. . Hi Carol, On Off-Topic, Mike asked if there were any threads/essays with the themes of: Marginalizing women Denigrating social activism Bowdlerizing teenage sexuality I gave him threads addressing Gender and House Elf Loyalty. (I had to look up Bowdgiganticeighteendollarwordwhenabuckfiftywordwouldsufficelerizing) Perhaps we could address those themes. Or... I know someone who was a English prof, maybe she could come up with some fun themes. I'll email her off list :) Kemper, who apologizes if he's contributed to forum agitation. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 19:56:28 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 19:56:28 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152379 Carol earlier: > > Where is the evidence that she used force or that she "used love > > potion to make him marry her"? All we know is that she wanted him to > > love her. The potion, which creates an obsession with a person may > > have compelled him to propose to her, take his marriage vows, and make > > love to his lawfully wedded wife, but there's no evidence that Merope > > had either sex or marriage in mind when she gave it to him. > Gerry: > Well, she could have said no. She was under no compulsion and new > exactly what was going on. Yet they were married. > > Besides, you ignore that it is not canon that she gave him a love > potion. It is DD's idea that she used this option to compell him > because to her it would have been more romantic than Imperius. So it > is equally possible she used Imperius as somebody already pointed out. Carol responds: Is it really "equally possible," or even plausible? It was actually Harry's suggestion, not Dumbledore's (HBP Am. ed. 213) that she might have used an Imperius Curse (and given what we've seen of Merope, DD is certainly right that she would have preferred a "romantic" alternative). But where would Merope, whose brief lifespan predates the DEs and whose exposure to the WW seems limited, have learned the Imperius Curse? (Do we even know that the Unforgiveable Curses existed at that time? Maybe LV invented them.) For that matter, I'm still wondering where and how she learned to concoct a love potion. Gerry: > Well, even in the WW both parties have to give consent when they want to get married. If Tom had been in his right mind he would never have given consent, nothing postmodern or Muggle there. Carol responds: No one is denying that point, but it's nevertheless possible that he proposed (under the influence of the potion) and she accepted, the standard procedure in those days. We have no evidence that she compelled him to marry her at wandpoint, nor do love potions work that way. And of course she wouldn't say no. He was the handsome prince, figuratively speaking, who had come to rescue from her abusive home and deadend existence. (What girl in her position as combined Cinderella/ugly stepsister would not have had such fantasies?) > > To quote some canon: > 'Can you not think of any measure Merope could have taken to make Tom Riddle forget his Muggle companion and fall in love wit her instead?' > HBP Bloomsbury Hardcover edtion p. 201 > > Seems pretty clear cut to me. Carol: What seems clear to you? DD says that Merope wanted Tom to fall in love with her, exactly what I'm saying. But wanting a handsome man to fall in love with you, and taking measures to make it happen because you are lonely, desperate, ugly, unloved and without any chance that such a thing will happen naturally, is not the same as forcing that handsome man to have sex with you. I'm not condoning Merope's action, but I think it's perfectly understandable given the circumstances. Having Marvolo for a father and Morfin for a brother, living in a hovel with no hope of escape unless she takes some sort of action, with no example of ethical or responsible behavior, what else could be expected of her? None of us is perfect, and it's hard to see how anyone could expect perfection from Merope. (I personally think that she's meant to parallel the boys of her age who are tempted to join the Death Eaters and learn the hard way that they've made a serious mistake, but that's a matter for another post.) Carol earlier: > > Whom is Merope blaming for her circumstances? It's Tom Sr. who claims that he's been "hoodwinked." > Gerry: > Well, what could he have said? That he was enchanted by an evil witch? Carol: You're ignoring the question, which is "whom did Merope blame"? To my knowledge, we have no canon that she blamed anyone, not even the abusive Marvolo. She simply lost interest in living because she had lost the man she loved. > Carol earlier: > Merope does take responsibility for her actions by telling him that she's a witch and has been giving him a love potion. Her reward for her honesty is to be abandoned in London, penniless and pregnant. > Gerry: > We don't know that. This is all guesswork from DD. We know he got out and she was left. And I don't see why his running away should somehow have been wrong. Carol: Yes, guesswork from Dumbledore is *almost* all we have to work on. But I think we're meant to conclude that he's close to the truth. But we also have the Pensieve memories that show us what Merope was like, a forlorn, unloved, "defeated-looking" girl. As for Tom's running away, it isn't wrong in itself. What is wrong is leaving Merope and her unborn child with no means of support and making no effort later to trace his child and see that he or she was decently treated. He could have done so anonymously. In fact, if he had, he'd have discovered that he was free to marry. Sadly and ironically for all concerned, he just abandoned them to their fate. > > Carol: > You cannot conjure money or food even if you're a witch. She has > > no means of earning a living, and Tom Sr. knows that. > Gerry: > First, how should he? Second, thats is her problem. He was in fact > kidnapped and raped by her. He was USED. Carol: He knows perfectly well that she lived in filth and poverty. Second, how is the welfare of the child they both created "her problem"? Would you say that about a female rape victim? Nor is it a "fact" that she "kidnapped and raped" him, as I have taken pains to point out. You are taking your own position for granted. Gerry: > I don't see him having any parental responsibilities at all actually. If a woman is raped and gets pregnant and cannot get an abortion I don't see she has any parental responsibilities either. Carol: We're talking about the 1930s. Merope does not have the option of abortion, nor the resources to take care of her child. Tom Sr. is the legal father; therefore it is both his legal and moral responsibility to pay his fair share of the expenses. He has no right to leave her penniless. Of course Merope shares that responsibility, along with the burden of pregnancy as I pointed out earlier. But she has no resources. To quote my own post, "She is frightened, desperate, and demoralized. Tom, however angry and humiliated he may be, does not have to carry the child or give birth to it. He merely needs to provide for its welfare so that it won't be born in the street or taken to an orphanage. However he may feel about Merope, he is the child's father and is as responsible as she is for its welfare, both morally and legally, and in a much better position to do something about it. > Gerry: > Legally he is because of the forced marriage. But morally not at all. He is not so much the father as the forced deliverer of the sperm. > Merope did all of this to herself. Now I do agree that she probably > had no idea things would turn out like this, that her intentions were not evil. But her actions were. Carol: And so she should be condemned to starve to death in the streets of London, along with her unborn child? Why not just shoot her and put her out of her misery? If Muggle Tom was raised a Christian, he would have been taught to forgive those who trespass against him and even to do good unto them that hate you. Merope didn't hate him. She loved him. But she was poor, ugly, dirty, uneducated and wholly unsuitable as a wife. Yes, she tricked him into taking the potion because she wanted to be loved, but she also confessed what she had done. And what she got was not Christian forgiveness but utter rejection and a broken heart. For her, it was a death sentence. That may be your idea of mercy and right conduct. I assure you, it is not mine. Carol, with apologies for returning to a topic she is trying to abandon From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Wed May 17 19:57:48 2006 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 19:57:48 -0000 Subject: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152380 Here's what I've been thinking about recently... First, from the Mugglenet/Leaky JKR interview: "ES: Dumbledore is unrivalled in his knowledge of magic ? "JKR: Mmhm. "ES: Where did he learn it all? "JKR: I see him primarily as someone who would be self-taught. However, he in his time had access to superb teachers at Hogwarts, so he was educated in the same way that everyone else is educated. Dumbledore's family would be a profitable line of inquiry, more profitable than sweet wrappers." My question is why have we not actually been introduced to Aberforth? We only see him, through Harry's eyes, as `the barman of the Hog's Head'. We know he was in the Order, and we are told that he is a rather seedy character (goats shudder), but why has Harry not discovered who he is? Harry saw him in the Order's photo, albeit briefly, and sees him again in the Hog's Head in OotP: "The barman...was a grumpy-looking old man with a great deal of long grey hair and beard. He was tall and thin and looked vaguely familiar to Harry." Harry does not realise it is the same man, despite having seen a photo of him in his younger days. Then look at HBP ch.12 for example: "One was very tall and thin; squinting through his rain-washed glasses Harry recognised the barman who worked in the other Hogsmeade pub, the Hog's Head. As Harry, Ron and Hermione drew closer, the barman drew his cloak more tightly around his neck and walked away, leaving the shorter man to fumble with something in his arms." Why make a point of the fact that Harry can hardly see the guy what with the rain on his glasses and the cloak and the walking away? Is it important that Harry is unaware of the barman's family connection? What might be in store for Aberforth given that JKR hinted that Dumbledore's family had an interesting history? Are Dumbledore and Aberforth 'heirs of Gryffindor' or somesuch? Or is that just silly? Anyway, makes a change... JLV xx From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed May 17 20:17:20 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 20:17:20 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152381 Carol responds: > He must have known that he was condemning them both to poverty and > perhaps starvation, and yes, it was his duty, as the child's father > and the girl's husband (tricked into marriage or not) to provide > for them. The only part of his marriage vows that he kept was > to "forsake all others," giving up the woman he would have > preferred to marry. And that, IMO, is the chief cause of his > suffering, which is not nearly as great as hers. SSSusan, who cannot BELIEVE she's entering into this thread, says: Setting aside the issue of who suffered more (I definitely believe each suffered, so I'm NOT arguing Merope didn't suffer a LOT), I just can't believe Tom's "marriage vows" enter into this at all. Let's say someone slipped a mickey into Hagrid's brewski down at the Three Broomsticks, and then asked him to sign a contract saying he'd leave Hogwarts forever. Would anyone -- would any court -- hold him to that "contract"? To me, that's a parallel with Tom. If he took his marriage "vows" under the influence of Merope's love potion, then why is he obligated to keep to those vows/that contract? And even if you're not arguing that he had a legal obligation to stand by her, I also don't think many people would feel he had any moral obligation either, regardless of how pathetic the situation was. *I'm* guessing he was horrified by what she had done and couldn't wait to get away. Am I alone in thinking that's how most of us would react if someone had tricked us into such a relationship and totally altered our life?? I'm not Catholic, but I do know that one of the conditions under which a marriage can be annulled is if one of the parties was misled by the other. Again, this seems so obvious to me that that's what Merope did -- she misled Tom, tricked him. Why should he be under any obligation to her? It's NOT the same to me as a person making a foolish mistake (e.g., getting drunk and then signing a contract or having sex with someone). It's that the ability to choose for oneself was removed. I don't understand how a person who's ability to choose to whom s/he is attracted or not should be held accountable for behavior springing forth from that false attraction. Carol: > To return to the "rape" idea, please find me some evidence that > anyone in the book considers Tom Sr.to be the victim of rape. > Dumbledore certainly doesn't, nor does Harry. Nor does Tom Sr. > himself claim anything of the sort. He says that he > was "hoodwinked," meaning, according to Dumbledore, tricked nto > marrying a girl he didn't and couldn't love. SSSusan: Dumbledore "certainly" doesn't? I can't go along with that. He *might* not; it isn't clear; it wasn't asked directly. (IIRC. That is, I don't recall Harry saying, "You mean she RAPED him??") I know people hate when this card is pulled, but... um... CHILDREN'S book, anyone? Is JKR going to use the term "rape" in a series where the farthest she's gone is "snogging"? (Nobody talking about getting to 3rd base; no pregnancies amongst the students.) To me "hoodwinked" is a safer term, in that *kids* might focus on "trickery," whereas adults might take it much more as a euphemism for a forced relationship. Carol: > And when he did have it, it was consensual sex with his lawfully > wedded wife , or so he would have seen it at the time. Merope was > not standing over him with a wand or a gun forcing him to have sex. SSSusan: Again, *lawfully*? Would a court of law uphold a marriage which took place under these circumstances? I cannot imagine it. And how do we know it was consensual? Just because he... ahem... got it up and did the deed doesn't prove it was consensual. How do we know love potions don't allow for the arousal itself? And one caveat: I'm NOT arguing for a Merope who tinentionally "raped" or "abused" Tom. I see a very desperate person who didn't know any way out of her situation nor any other way to get Tom to "love" her. Her sad, desperate situation still doesn't make what she did okay, nor (imo) does it require Tom to fulfill any marital "vows" or "obligations." Siriusly Snapey Susan From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 20:39:54 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 20:39:54 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152382 > >>Betsy Hp wrote: > > You're completely and totally wrong about this, Carol. Rape is > > rape is rape. Male or female, a victim of rape *is* effected. > > > >>Carol: > Thank you for the circular definition, Betsy, but I know what rape > is, and if I didn't, I'm afraid that "rape is rape is rape" > wouldn't enlighten me. Betsy Hp: Honestly, I'm starting to think the reason this issue has become so heated is because there *isn't* an agreement on what rape is. Here's the comment I was responding to: > >>Carol: > > > > If Tom were merely the victim of unwanted sex with a girl he was > > repulsed by, he could have gotten over it just as men get over > > having sex with girls they don't know after having had too many > > drinks, or encounters with prostitutes that they later regret > > but don't spend their lives reliving and repenting. Men don't > > make a big deal about losing their virginity or undesirable sex > > partners unless there are other consequences like venereal > > disease or the woman's pregnancy. Betsy Hp: Unwanted sex *is* rape. So you appeared to be taking the rather cavalier view that a raped man should just "get over it". Which I did find absolutely horrifying. The suggestion that this is what all male rape victims do, and that men don't even care about their virginity or who they have sex with, etc., struck me as totally and completely wrong. So that's what I said. > >>Carol: > > I am more than a bit offended that you would imply that I have no > compassion for the victims of pederasty and homosexual rape, which > of course are brutal and horrendous crimes. May I politely point > that we are talking about something rather different here? Betsy Hp: Tom was not physically brutalized. Physically he was unhurt. His will was subjugated, he was completely dominated by his "wife" and he was made to turn his back on anything he may have cared for (friends, family, social standing, what have you). So yes, this is a different sort of rape. One that included Tom's mind as well as his body. Frankly, I believe it equates with a mother raping her son, and making him feel that he's lucky to be so completely loved. The analogy isn't perfect, but I think it illustrates the authority Merope had over Tom when she destroyed his will by using either a love potion or the Imperius curse. > >>Carol: > Nor can what Merope did be compared to Morfin whisking Tom away to > have homosexual sex with him. Betsy Hp: Not even if Morfin gave Tom a love potion, and Tom was positive that he'd found his true love? > >>Carol: > Merope gave Tom a *Love* potion. Betsy Hp: Or she used the Imperius curse. Canon never clarifies it. Dumbledore makes a guess, but it's based on his view of the aggressor's mind set, not on the victim's behavior. (Apparently a Muggle under the influence of a love potion reacts exactly like a Muggle hit by the Imperius curse.) > >>Carol: > Given her background, is it not conceivable that she took the name > at face value and thought that it would make him *love* her? Betsy Hp: Oh, I can totally buy that. Still doesn't change what happened to Tom. He was raped by a woman trying to make him love her. Just as, if Morfin had been the one throwing the curse or giving Tom the potion, Tom would have been raped by a man trying to make him love him. > >>Carol: > > We know that Tom claimed to be "hoodwinked," meaning that he was > tricked into marrying Merope, not into having sex with her. Surely > the marriage to a woman he didn't love, a marriage that he > could not legally escape from, was a more serious matter to a > young man like Tom than a few acts of what would have been > consensual sex with a woman he thought he loved or revulsion at > the thought of sex with Merope? > Betsy Hp: How do we know that "hoodwinked" means trapped into marriage, but not into sex? How do we know that Tom was more horrified at being forced into a marriage he didn't want than into a sexual encounter he didn't want? How do we know what sort of man Tom is? (I suppose we're to presume that the villagers are as correct about snobby Tom as they're incorrect about murderer Frank?) And my biggest question: how is unwanted sex consensual? I take it you would say the little boy who tried to kill his grandparents in HBP is guilty of attempted murder despite the use of Imperius? > >>Carol: > All I am asking is a little understanding and compassion for > Merope, who does not fit the pattern of a rapist or even a > seductress. Betsy Hp: I pointed this out before, but Merope fits exactly the stereotypical witch who seduces and rapes the virtuous young man from a good home of folk lore and fairy tales. From the hovel she lives in to her physical ugliness, I think JKR had fun playing with that old, old image. > >>Carol: > > I am afraid that certain members of this list would have burned > her at the stake if they had discovered her "crime." Betsy Hp: Merope feels she should die for her crime, and so she does. I actually do feel bad for her, but I can do that while at the same time recognizing that she did rape Tom. But yeah, in a time when people did believe in witches, Tom would have been believed, Merope would have been jailed, her child would have been adopted into an anonymous family, and she would have been burned or stoned or drowned or otherwise put to death. Of course, that was a more brutal time, when thieves were put to death as well. I'm not actually saying that's what should have happened to Merope. But maybe some punishment would have done her some good. Helped her get over her guilt so that she could learn to live again. > >>Carol: > (How dare a woman use power of any sort on a man? She must be an > evil seductress, no, a rapist, and a witch at that! Send her out > to die of starvation with her unborn brat! That's the mentality > I'm seeing here, and I don't think it's the view that JKR wants us > to have.) > Betsy Hp: I'm afraid I have a hard time seeing a rapist as a feminist martyr, I don't care if that's what JKR had in mind or not. And yeah, I also don't care if you're male or female or aardvark: totally subjucating someone to your will is a no-no in my book. Betsy Hp (who did a crap load of editing to this reply to try to be as inoffensive as possible) From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 17 21:06:03 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:06:03 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152383 > Pippin: > I guess that's where we disagree -- there *is* something wrong with > acting on what you think is love but is really artificial obsession. Let's > remember that it doesn't take magic --there are whole industries in > the real world dedicated to inducing obsessions. > > Every day, movie stars get thousands of marriage proposals > from people they've never met. Famous criminals get them too. If the > obsessed person were accepted, I don't think they could ignore their > responsibility for their spouse or their child simply on the grounds > that they couldn't resist the hype. Magpie: That runs into the same problem as trying to make it a glamour; it erases the line that gets crossed when you violate someone's person. It's also, imo, using the word "obsession" more in its perfume sense, making it a synonym for finding someone desirable. There is no industry that creates obsession. It may produce likely objects for the obsessed, but it's not creating the feeling. Tom seems perfectly capable of rejecting stuff like that. That's why Merope had to drug him. If it was just like putting really attractive people in front of others and saying they should want them, it wouldn't require magic. "Obsession" is a compulsive preoccupation with a fixed idea or an unwanted feeling or emotion, often accompanied by symptoms of anxiety. "Compulsion" is an irresistible impulse to act, regardless of the rationality of the motivation. An "obsessive/compulsive" disorder is a mental disorder, not just another way of saying someone refuses to not act on his desires. A person doesn't act on his compulsions because he really wants to wash his hands or check to make sure the doors are locked again or pull out his hair or steal something, he acts on his compulsions because it's the only way to relieve a painful anxiety. If Tom did realize that this wasn't love he was feeling, because it didn't feel good, if he's suffering anything like obsession a cold shower is useless. The only way he can stop suffering is to be with Merope. It could feel very much like being enslaved. The love potion is described as being the most dangerous Potion in Slughorn's classroom iirc and, as others have pointed out, we don't even know if it was a Love Potion. It seems like it was since DD says it was, but I don't think Harry's suggestion of Imperius is supposed to just be wrong, it's a significant answer showing how the two are so similar. If a person proposed to a celebrity or a serial killer because the celebrity/serial killer drugged the person to make them feel an obsession with him/her I doubt the person would be held responsible for the marriage. The celebrity/serial killer would probably be the one up on charges. When you drug someone secretly, you are taking on responsibility for their behavior under the influence of the drug that you have given them because you have done something to control that behavior. -m From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Wed May 17 21:07:57 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:07:57 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152384 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan, who cannot BELIEVE she's entering into this thread, says: Steven1965aaa: I can't believe it either, but I just can't help myself... Yes, she was treated badly by her family, yes she was desperate due to obsessive love, but that doesn't justify what she did. Yes, Tom Sr. was hoodwinked, bewitched, slipped a mickey, etc., and he certainly had no obligation to the person that did that to him, but he still abandoned his kid. Neither of them come off as a particularly good person. Hence their evil spawn. From juli17 at aol.com Wed May 17 21:32:11 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:32:11 -0000 Subject: Snape, Snape, always Snape! (was Re: Amortentia and re The morality of love pot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152385 Alla wrote: > Merope did not deserve to die. Nobody deserves to die ( well, except > maybe Snape), but neither did Tom deserved any misery this woman > inflicted upon him. > > JMO, > > Alla Nobody except *maybe SNAPE*? Not Voldemort, who's orchestrated the murder of dozens? Not Fenrir, who eats children? Not Peter, a repeat murderer and betrayer of best friends? Not Bellatrix, Lucius Malfoy, or any of a dozen other vicious, torturing, murdering Death Eaters? Not that *%&#(% child abuser Umbridge? Just the meanest professor this side of Muggleland, Snape? Okay, admittedly he may or may not have cold-bloodedly murdered Dumbledore, but still! Why, oh why, must poor Snape be so horribly demonized compared to the other true monsters in the WW? Julie deflecting an increasingly bitter debate back to our favorite subject ;- ) From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Wed May 17 21:39:49 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:39:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny's Behavior/Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060517213949.50755.qmail@web37215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152386 Inufan_625: I would also like to add that Ginny didn't seem at all opposed to Bill marrying Tonks, which kind of negates the whole no one taking away her brother accusation. Make no mistake it is Fleur's attitude that draws her ire not the fact that Bill wants to marry her. Catherine now: I am repeating myself, but Ginny doesn't like Fleur because Fleur treats her like a baby. This is not new behavior. We have canon for Fleur's attitude towards Harry calling him "a little boy" in GoF and treating him as such. Her attitude towards him changes *only* when he rescues Gabrielle from the lake, not following his terrific flying and getting his egg from the *most* fearsom dragon of the 4. Also, Ginny would prefer Tonks in the family, because Tonks makes them laugh and is fun to have around. Everyone is wrong thinking that Molly is trying to get Bill interested, Molly only invites Tonks when Lupin is coming over trying to get them together. In fact it's Ginny who defends Bill and Fleur from Molly when she reminds her mother that she and Arthur got married very young, and very quickly. And defends them again saying that Bill likes adventure and glamour, which explains why he fell for Fleur. Granted, she did call her a "cow" and "Phlegm" in that paragraph, but she still defended the pairing. The Weasley family, or at least some of them, don't like Fleur for a variety of reasons, well, actually only two: her looks and her attitude. I do consider them shallow for disliking her because she is beautiful, but they have other reason's as well. Being part Veela, Fleur must have come across this before, and maybe, just maybe instead of criticizing everything about her family-in-law's lifestyle, keep your mouth shut and be nice. Defending Fleur because of her left-handed compliment that Ginny would look nice in pale gold, doesn't get her off the hook for saying that she would "look 'orrible in pink". That's just not the right way to go about things, with anyone, let alone your mother-in-law's only daughter! On the other hand, Fleur probably hasn't had many normal interactions with other women, because of her background. It must be hard to learn how to behave when everyone is focussed on your looks and is intimidated by you. I guess you learn to feel above everyone because everyone seems to feel below you. As for Ginny being funny or not, some people will think she is, others will not. Some people think the Twins are funny, others that they are evil...it's a matter of opinion. A problem we have with Ginny is that she is not the main character, and a lot of her story happens off-page. We only see glimpses of her here and there, and they never seem to be the good glimpses. We always seem to catch her in her less-then-stellar moments, and she seems to have more of them when Harry's around...coincidence? catherine (who has to feed her *starving* children..."Mommy, what's for supper? Mommy, are you still on the computer? Mommy.....") --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail - --------------------------------- Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 17 21:41:04 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:41:04 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152387 > SSSusan: > And even if you're not arguing that he had a legal obligation to > stand by her, I also don't think many people would feel he had any > moral obligation either, regardless of how pathetic the situation > was. *I'm* guessing he was horrified by what she had done and > couldn't wait to get away. Am I alone in thinking that's how most of > us would react if someone had tricked us into such a relationship and > totally altered our life?? > > I'm not Catholic, but I do know that one of the conditions under > which a marriage can be annulled is if one of the parties was misled > by the other. Again, this seems so obvious to me that that's what > Merope did -- she misled Tom, tricked him. Why should he be under > any obligation to her? > a_svirn: I absolutely agree that Tom had no obligation to Merope under the circumstances. His obligations to his child is quite another matter, though. I would say that if he were a wizard he would have a moral (although not legal, since such marriage should be proclaimed null and void under the law) obligation to provide for his child. But he was not. He was a muggle who was sexually abused and violated by a witch. I suppose once the "enchantment" in question was finally lifted he was not just traumatized or angry or whatever. I think he was terrified and ran for it. And as well he might. How was he to know that she wouldn't repeat the performance? Or maybe come up with something even more creative? > Carol: > > To return to the "rape" idea, please find me some evidence that > > anyone in the book considers Tom Sr.to be the victim of rape. > > Dumbledore certainly doesn't, nor does Harry. Nor does Tom Sr. > > himself claim anything of the sort. He says that he > > was "hoodwinked," meaning, according to Dumbledore, tricked nto > > marrying a girl he didn't and couldn't love. > > SSSusan: > Dumbledore "certainly" doesn't? I can't go along with that. He > *might* not; it isn't clear; it wasn't asked directly. (IIRC. That > is, I don't recall Harry saying, "You mean she RAPED him??") I know > people hate when this card is pulled, but... um... CHILDREN'S book, > anyone? Is JKR going to use the term "rape" in a series where the > farthest she's gone is "snogging"? (Nobody talking about getting to > 3rd base; no pregnancies amongst the students.) To me "hoodwinked" > is a safer term, in that *kids* might focus on "trickery," whereas > adults might take it much more as a euphemism for a forced > relationship. a_svirn: Well, actually "hoodwinked" in this instance is neither "children- proof" term, nor turn of phrase expressing being tricked into an unwonted marriage. What Dumbledore actually says is that *villagers* put such a construction on Tom Sr. words. He himself, however, ? according to Dumbledore ? meant something else entirely: "You see, within a few months of their runaway marriage, 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' and 'taken in.' What *he* meant, I am sure, is that he had been *under an enchantment* that had now lifted, though I daresay he did not dare use those precise words for fear of being thought insane. When *they* heard what he was saying, however, the *villagers* guessed that Merope had lied to Tom Riddle, pretending that she was going to have his baby, and that he had married her for this reason" [emphasis mine a_svirn]. So you see, it was his being "under an enchantment" that turned Tom's world upside-down, not his being married to a socially unacceptable girl. (Although I suppose, it added insult to injury.) And being "under an enchantment" in this instance means being sexually violated. We may quibble whether or not Merope actions constitute rape, since Tom wasn't exactly ravished (although he may have been, at that). Modern usage certainly allows this interpretation. (See OD "3. a. Violation or ravishing of a woman. Also, in mod. usage, sexual assault upon a man."; "3. To ravish, commit rape on (a woman). Also, with a man as the sexual object and a man or woman as the subject.") So, although Tom probably wasn't "ravished", there is no question that he was violated. Even if he himself wouldn't use the word *rape*. From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Wed May 17 22:10:32 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 22:10:32 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152388 Often through the books little details later turn out to be important. I was wondering, why did JKR take pains to make it clear that levicorpus is a nonverbal spell? It could be a meaningless detail, but maybe not. I have a guess. Maybe this has been thought of before, but anyway, at the end of HBP Snape says "You dare use my own spells against me, Potter? It was I who invented them ... you'd turn my inventions on me, like your filthy father ..." So we know James used the Spell, and we know that Snape invented it. How did James learn the spell? Since its nvbl, he did not hear Snape say it and copy him. He could only have learned it from the HBP potions book. How did he get his hands on Snape's potions book? Snape was sharing it with Lily, which accounts for Slughorn's repeated references to her potions ability. From spirittalks at gmail.com Wed May 17 22:24:03 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 18:24:03 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] (nvbl) References: Message-ID: <010201c67a00$9b337fb0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 152389 Steven: Often through the books little details later turn out to be important. I was wondering, why did JKR take pains to make it clear that levicorpus is a nonverbal spell? It could be a meaningless detail, but maybe not. I have a guess. Maybe this has been thought of before, but anyway, at the end of HBP Snape says "You dare use my own spells against me, Potter? It was I who invented them ... you'd turn my inventions on me, like your filthy father ..." So we know James used the Spell, and we know that Snape invented it. How did James learn the spell? Since its nvbl, he did not hear Snape say it and copy him. He could only have learned it from the HBP potions book. How did he get his hands on Snape's potions book? Snape was sharing it with Lily, which accounts for Slughorn's repeated references to her potions ability. Kim: This is what I love about JKR's writing. She puts these gems in the most innocent places and we get to find them and play with them. I wonder about the reference to Harry's "filthy father" using Levicorpus, though. Snape says that he invented the spells (plural) and that Harry's father turned his inventions (again plural) on him. Is he referring to the spell Harry had just flung at Snape or was he referring to other spells that James may have heard Snape use outloud? I kind of hope it's the way you're suggesting because that would be more fun to hear about. Kim [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Wed May 17 22:28:50 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 22:28:50 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) In-Reply-To: <010201c67a00$9b337fb0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152390 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kim" wrote: >> This is what I love about JKR's writing. She puts these gems in the most innocent places and we get to find them and play with them. I wonder about the reference to Harry's "filthy father" using Levicorpus, though. Snape says that he invented the spells (plural) and that Harry's father turned his inventions (again plural) on him. Is he referring to the spell Harry had just flung at Snape or was he referring to other spells that James may have heard Snape use outloud? I kind of hope it's the way you're suggesting because that would be more fun to hear about. > Kim > > Steven1965aaa: I'm pretty sure this was right after Harry tried to use levicorpus. > From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed May 17 22:36:03 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 22:36:03 -0000 Subject: Fleur and the Weasley women In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152391 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > > While I agree that Fleur Delacour could have been a lot more > polite when we saw her _chez_ Weasley, I think there'd have > been a lot of friction even if she was as sweet .... > > Molly Weasley is used to being _the_ Alpha Female in that > little pack, and does not care much for competition. And > Fleur, being part-veela, can't help but make guys go slightly > gaga, which had to irritate Molly (and Ginny). > > I shouldn't be a bit surprised to find out that part-veela > women often have a lot of trouble getting along with "normal" > magical women, merely because their "attraction" creates a great > deal of resentment > .... > bboyminn: Of course we have just been treated to a very long and polarized thread on the Ginny/Hermione/Molly/Fleur dynamic. A thread in which I personally think people are making far too big a deal out of what I see as nothing but a bunch of fun comedy relief. To my first point, Fleur is out of her element at the Weasley house. She is among essentially strangers on whom she depends for everything. Everyone has their favorite chair in the living room, their favorite chair at the dinner table, they have their favorite topics of conversation, and Fleur is very much odd-man-out. Been there, done that. Haven't you ever been over to a friends house when his/her parents were there? It completely throws off the dynamic. When you are alone with your friends you can be free and easy. When the parents are there, everything is uptight, awkward, and uncomfortably formal. In otherwords, extremely unpleasant for a teen. So, Fleur is in an already uncomfortable and awkward situation, her relationship is with Bill, all these other people are merely strangers she has to put up with. And to the Weasley, again their relationship is with Bill not Fleur, so she is merely a stranger they are obligated to welcome into their home, but with whom they really have nothing in common. Next, Fleur is a bit obnoxious, a bit conceited, a bit full of herself, and just generally annoying to the steady comfortable people of the Weasley household. Believe it or not, that's perfectly normal. Next, compound everything by Fleur Veela-ness, and you have a social cocktail built for resentment. I'm sure there is a small element of Hermione, Ginny, Molly, and probably everyone else who wonders if Bill is really in love, or if he has simply been enchanted by Fleur's Veela-ness. That added element of suspicion and distrust is probably subconscious, but very real none the less. Finally, the /Alpha-Female/ aspect. I'm really glad you brought that up because, I think we have several Alpha-Females thrown into the mix. Ginny is no slouch amoung her peers; she's as Alpha as they come. While she may be an alpha-female amoung her peers, she reins it in around Molly because Molly is her mother; Alpha-Mother always trumps Alpha-Daughter. Though it is much more subtle, Hermione is an Alpha-Female. She is not a follower. She doesn't hang around with gangs of simpering girly-girls. She is not an assertive Alpha-Female, but she is certainly not a follower or one of the pack. She is strong, forceful, independant, and determined. Compound all this by Fleur being an Alpha-Female, and you have a powder keg ready to blow. Fleur is outgoing, outspoken, assertive, and apparently used to being deferred to and getting her own way. She top student in her school, a tri-wizards champion, and the one to win the heart of the boy she chose. Throw together that many alpha-anything, and you are asking for trouble. Normally, Molly rules the roost. But Fleur, I suspect, see no need to yeild to Molly's authority. So, put Fleur and her /unique/ personality into a socially awkward situation with nothing in common and nothing to talk about, and there is bound to be some underlying hostility. Lacking any subjects in common, Fleur has nothing to talk about but the wedding, which she manages to do in a way that is consistent with her self-center obnoxious personality. So, people are annoyed, but anyone in that same circumstance is going to feel a degree of annoyance. Most people just endure the 'meet the parents/family' stage and hope it ends mercifully soon. Given all that, I thought people acted as expected. Ginny, Hermione, and Molly are annoyed by Fleur, how could they not be, but they accept it. But even in accepting it, it feels good to blow off some steam when Fleur isn't around. That's really what friends are for, to allow you to say the things that you can't say in any other social situation. So, they have some fun at Fleur expense, and have a laugh or two. That's not really as harmful as people are making it out. It's actually very healthy to have an outlet for that frustration, that prevents it from building into something far more regretable. Fleur, on the other hand, is ignoring them and endlessly prattling on about the Wedding, and what color are the dresses, and who's going to do this and that. Partly, as I said, because it is the only topic of conversation they have in common, and partly because with Fleur everything is me, me, me. But I think the scene in the Hospital Wing at Hogwarts made converts out of the doubters. Fleur has shown a fierce unwavering dedication to Bill, and I think that helps remove any doubts as to whether Fleur was actually in love with Bill, or just enjoying playing the role of the bride-to-be. So we have- -the Clash of the Social Awkward Situations. -the Clash of the Alpah-Females. -the Clash of the Oddball in-laws that must be endured by all. -and the ever painful Meet the Parents & Family. Which all adds up to one funny chapter in my book, and in JKR's too. Steve/bboyminn From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Wed May 17 23:29:58 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 19:29:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Lily could have saved herself In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060517232958.39940.qmail@web53304.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152392 Goddlefrood wrote: This theory really falls somewhere between the history of magic and the future of the books. I am firmly of the view that JKR would not have placed as much emphasis as she has on Lily's gifts as a potioneer unless they were to play an important role in book 7. It is a part of the history of the wizarding world that Lily is deceased, but it has also been declared, by Voldemort himself, that Lily needn't have died. There is a plausible explanation for this, which runs something like this: Harry discovers that the reason Lily might have been spared was that she had discovered some powerful potion that no one (apart from perhaps Snape) is aware of and which has qualities that would finish off the evil that men do or strip a wizard of his powers perhaps. Only she was capable of making it thus explaining why Voldemort was prepared to spare her life, but she refused to co-operate, as we know, and was, therefore, killed. The secret potion then went with her to her grave. Any other plausible explanations out there? Luckdragon: I always thought the main reason she did not have to die was due to the fact LV only wanted to terminate James's direct line, possibly due to the fact that they were Gryffindor's last living descendants. LV may have been planning on using her for her abilities, but they could not have been that great if he killed her anyway. He was supposedly powerful enough at the time that he could have gotten to Harry without killing her if she was that important. --------------------------------- Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Wed May 17 20:40:35 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 13:40:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060517204035.82977.qmail@web61317.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152393 justcarol67 wrote: Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own lives and social views? BTW, does anyone besides me think that Ron's remark in HBP about Draco's Hand of Glory is a Flint? Draco (or rather Lucius) didn't buy the Hand of Glory in CoS, just at the point when Lucius was selling Dark artifacts because he was anticipating a Ministry raid. How could Ron know that Draco had the Hand of Glory, and when could Draco have bought it? Is it the thing he didn't want to be seen carrying down the street? If so, Ron is wrong that he already had it. Joe: Okay here is one. A lot of people believe that very small signs or trival statements in one book become central themes or important issues in later books. So what small details do you think might play a surprising part in book seven? My wife is convinced that Ron is going to display some sort of power or increase in magical aptitude because of the statement made by one of the twins. Ron says something along the lines of "Just wait until I'm seventeen and I can do magic." in the kitchen of the Burrow. One of the twins George I believe replies along the lines of "Then you will dazzle us with hereto unseen magical abilities." Foreshadowing or just a very nice comeback by an older brother? Joe From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu May 18 00:13:31 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 00:13:31 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Whatever_happened_to_the_Prince=92s_potions_book=3F_(was:_Request_for_new_topics)?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152394 What happened to Prince's potions book since Harry had hidden it in the RoR, and where is it now? The answer seems obvious to me ? Draco has it. Here is what we are told about the place in the RoR where Harry hides the book: *************************************************** HBP Ch. 24 pp. 526-527 (Scholastic): Harry hurried forward into one of the many alleyways between all this hidden treasure. He turned right past an enormous stuffed troll, ran on a short way, took a left at the broken Vanishing Cabinet in which Montague had got lost the previous year, finally pausing beside a large cupboard that seemed to have had acid thrown at its blistered surface. He opened one of the cupboard's creaking doors: It had already been used as a hiding place for something in a cage that had long since died; its skeleton had five legs. He stuffed the Half-Blood Princes book behind the cage and slammed the door. He paused for a moment, his heart thumping horribly, gazing around at all the clutter. . . . Would he be able to find this spot again amidst all this junk? Seizing the chipped bust of an ugly old warlock from on top of a nearby crate, he stood it on top of the cupboard where the book was now hidden, perched a dusty old wig and a tarnished tiara on the statues head to make it more distinctive, then sprinted back through the alleyways of hidden junk as fast as he could go, back to the door, back out onto the corridor, where he slammed the door behind him, and it turned at once back into stone. *************************************************** The skeleton in the cage is probably the Hand of Glory. Why else would it have five "legs"? Draco must have hidden it there, near the Vanishing Cabinet he was working on, in preparation for his final operation, and also because this would be by far the best hiding place at Hogwarts for such a Dark object. Of course, he would easily deduce from the number of artifacts around that other students (and teachers) know about the RoR and use it, so he had to disguise the Hand as something more innocent ? put it in a cage and it looks like the skeleton of a little animal. Harry hidden the book right behind the cage, and he marked the cupboard in a way that Draco couldn't have missed. He must have found the book. Maybe it wasn't a coincidence that soon after it Draco succeeded in fixing the Cabinet he couldn't fix for almost a year. Could the book also have a Fixem-sempra spell in it? Harry never came back for the book, although he wanted to: *************************************************** HBP Ch. 24 p. 530: "Are you telling me," said Hermione, "that you're going to go back ? ?" "And get the book? Yeah, I am," said Harry forcefully. *************************************************** ...but it was too dangerous: *************************************************** HBP Ch. 25 p. 537: He had not dared to return to the Room of Requirement to retrieve his book, and his performance in Potions was suffering accordingly (though Slughorn, who approved of Ginny, had jocularly attributed this to Harry being lovesick). But Harry was sure that Snape had not yet given up hope of laying hands on the Prince's book, and was determined to leave it where it was while Snape remained on the lookout. *************************************************** After Dumbledore's death, the Trio talks about the book (p.638) but there's no mentioning of going back to get it, so Harry wouldn't find out that Draco took it. What did Draco do with it? It doesn't look like he was carrying it on the tower or during the flight, but he had several hours since he had managed to fix the Vanishing Cabinet until the operation started. He could have easily gone to Borgin & Burks. Maybe he even called the DEs from there. He'd know that, whether the operation succeeded or not, he'd probably won't be able to stay at Hogwarts after it, so he'd take with him to B&B any valuable possessions he didn't want to leave behind. And the book was right there in the RoR, why not take it too? Draco would probably conclude that it was Harry who had hidden the book there (maybe only the sixth year NEWT class use these textbooks ? that would certainly limit the number of suspects) especially if he finds the Sectumsempra spell. And he would immediately conclude that this was the secret behind Harry's success in potions. Would he also figure out that it was Snape's? And if so, which of Snape's schooldays secret are in there that Draco might find interesting? Neri From aceworker at yahoo.com Thu May 18 00:21:49 2006 From: aceworker at yahoo.com (career advisor) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:21:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Fleur & the Weasley Women/ Love potions Message-ID: <20060518002149.52725.qmail@web30213.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152395 "ericoppen" oppen at mycns.net Date: Wed May 17, 2006 10:30am(PDT) Subject: Fleur and the Weasley women Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152396 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > > Leslie41: > > That's fallacious reasoning. It's a non-sequitur. It doesn't > necessarily follow that if these issues aren't dealt with that DD > finds the abuse of children "good and noble" and "worthwhile." Of course it does, IMO. We are not dealing with just anyone here, after all (although just anyone would have a lot to answer for). Rather, we are dealing with "the epitome of goodness," the "very wise man" who "knows everything that goes on at Hogwarts." Pretty damning, if you ask me. > > But of course it is. Especially since what the Marauders do to > Snape, or attempt to do, is far, far, worse than ANYTHING that Snape > has ever done to his students. I guess my answer to that would be, NOPE, what was done to Snape was most certainly NOT, IMO, in the same league with what he does to his students. The difference in position of authority between Snape and Harry, IMO, magnifies Snape's actions far out of the league of whatever was done to teenage Snape by the Marauders. > > Snape was 15 once, too. He was humiliated, and then nearly killed, > and neither Lupin nor DD held Sirius and James accountable. > (Certainly Black wasn't expelled, which one might expect when one > student attempts to murder another.) Black even became a valued > member of the Order. > I think this is absolutely and totally irrelevent. Nothing that was done to Snape, by omission or commission, in any way excuses his abuse of Harry and Neville or IN ANY WAY releases him from punishment for that reprehensible abuse. Nor does it in any way lessen Dumbledore's fault in allowing the abuse to take place and continue. Lupinlore From drednort at alphalink.com.au Thu May 18 01:03:38 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:03:38 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: <20060517123513.67667.qmail@web61314.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060517030538.M35428@alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: <446C548A.7223.3536687@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152397 Replying to more than one post at once - Joe Goodwin, then Dan, then houyhnhnm. On 17 May 2006 at 5:35, Joe Goodwin wrote: > > Shaun Hately wrote: > The thing is - as I have said previously, I *benefited* greatly from some > Snape-like teachers I had as a child. > > > Joe: Thats fair enough but how many of your fellow students > educations suffered because of the method that allowed you to > flourish. Shaun: And I come back to the questions why are those kids more important than kids like me? Why does every teacher in every school have to be the type of teacher they need, rather than the type of teacher I needed? I was seriously and severely harmed by aspects of my education - to the extent that I developed severe clinical depression that I will probably never completely recover from (with a lot of help, I have substantially recovered to the extent that this isn't a limiting factor in my life anymore, but it's still there hovering around the edges.) Eight years of largely inappropriate education, culminating in a year of total educational hell left me on the brink of suicide - and that's a very serious statement. I know a fair bit about being harmed by teachers. *But* the vast majority of the children who were in those classes with me over those eight years of schooling were not harmed by those teachers. Many flourished under them. Should the fact that I was being harmed - and I was - mean that none of those kids should have got the education they received and benefitted from? Why would it have made one iota of sense for them to be penalised in favour of me? I don't believe it would have. I believe - and I really wish - that steps should have been taken to try and reduce the negative impact on myself - but not by denying other children the benefits they were receiving. And the same applies in reverse when I talk about the Snape-like teachers. I benefitted from them. And I believe I had every right to have some teaching in thirteen years of schooling that addressed my needs rather than addressing everyone elses. And, as it happens, I don't know of anyone who was in those classes with me and my Snape-like teachers who would say that they were harmed by those teachers. Some of them didn't *like* the classes. Some of them *hate* the teacher. But even they acknowledge they learned from him. I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere someone feels they were harmed in those classes - but if so, they are a real minority. And I was part of the minority harmed in a lot of my classes that benefitted other kids, and it seems that I'm just supposed to always accept the greater good. And, in fact, for the most part I do. I think it is pretty much impossible for every class in every school to be good for every single child who takes it. I just think every kid should have at least some classes that work for them - and I only had a few. And some of those were the ones taught by Snapes. Get rid of those teachers, and I'd have had even less. > Joe: No your needs were important but that shows one of the great > flaws of Snape. A good teacher is able to reach out to almost all > students. Shaun: Yes, but *almost all* isn't the same as *all*. And frankly, I don't see any reason to assume that Snape isn't able to reach out to most of his students as a teacher. Yes, I think there's another evidence to say that he can't do this with Neville. But Neville is one student. He's not a majority of students. Neville has particular issues that mean he has a lot of problems in a lot of classes - they do seem to be more acute in Snape's classes, and I think Snape's method of teaching not meshing with Neville's needs has a lot to do with that, but the fundamental issues are with Neville. Not with Snape. The evidence we have is that most students do well in Snape's classes. He does seem to be a successful with most of his students. Now, I'm not sure that I would call Snape a good teacher. But frankly, most teachers aren't good teachers in my view. You have a few good ones, you have many competent but average ones. And you have a few bad ones. While I wouldn't necessarily put Snape into the top group (I'd need more evidence for that), I certainly wouldn't put him into the bottom group. Teachers like Binns, Trelawney, and Umbridge - I would class them as bad teachers. Binns and Umbridge don't teach - they simply provide a venue for students to learn (and, of course, with Umbridge, you also have the added evil aspect), and, though Trelawney does have some prophetic abilities, she seems to make up a lot of her classes as she goes along - I don't think she's as bad a teacher as Binns or Umbridge, because at least some of what she teaches seems to be based on real theory (whether it's good theory or bad). > Shaun: > I sometimes wonder - those people who are so opposed to Snape's teaching > methods - what do they make of kids like me? Do they think we're unimportant? > Or do they think we're delusional and utterly mistaken about what worked for > us and what didn't? > > Joe: > Sorry but I'm not really sure what your point here is Shaun: Well, let me try and clarify it then. (-8 My point is that it seems to me (and this is just my impression) that many of those who believe Snape is a 'bad teacher' seem to be basing that belief on a view that Snape is harming some of his students (or at least one of his students), and that this fact overrides all other facts. That it doesn't matter what else is happening in Snape's classroom - if Neville is unhappy (or Harry is unhappy; or Hermione is unhappy) that means he shouldn't be allowed to teach. To them, the possibility that other children in those classes might be learning and learning well from Snape, doesn't seem to have any value or importance at all. As I say, this is just my impression of some of the anti-Snape-the- teacher grouping. To me, the only way I can see that type of viewpoint making sense is if they have decided one of two things. (1) That it's actually impossible that anybody else could be benefitting from Snape's classes. (2) That it doesn't matter if anybody else is benefitting from Snape's classes. I'm not saying that there aren't other possibilities besides these two - just that these two are the two that are apparent to me. Well, with regards to the first, more than one person on this list, even over the last couple of days - has made it clear that they did benefit from teachers like Snape in their own education. I'm one of them, but I'm not the only one. So if there are people who hold the first view above, it seems to me that they must think we are delusional or mistaken about what benefitted us and what didn't. And, with regards to the second - if people are putting other children's needs above the needs of those kids who are like me, and like the other people who say they benefitted from such teaching - then I find it hard to avoid the conclusion that they think we're less important than other kids - and that our needs can be sacrificed for the sake of other children. Well, I've been there - years of my life in an education system that had explicitly decided that my needs had low priority or no priority. And that system almost killed me. And it did kill friends of mine. So it's a view I find somewhat disturbing to be honest. Now, I am not saying these are the views that those who support the idea that Snape is a bad teacher hold. There may be many other possibilities. But I do wonder sometimes. > Shaun: > > First of all, I just want to start with two little quotes - at least one of > which I have shared before. This first quote comes directly from my most > Snape-like teacher (a decade and a half after he taught me, I find him quite > easy to talk to) when I mentioned to him that I compared him to Snape and used > him as an example of how a Snape-like teacher could be a good thing. He agreed > with me that he was like that, and other people had made the comparison. Later > on he sent me an e-mail with further discussion of this and I asked his > permission to quote this little paragraph. > > Shaun: > Joe: So he is the best eh? Does he have any documentation for that > or just a inflated sense of self worth? I take it he teaches at a boys > school because otherwise he just ignored a bit more than half the > population. Yes, he does teach at a boys school. And, as it happens, he is regarded as just about the best teacher of classics in the country - the marks his students receive reflect that, and his colleagues readily acknowledge it. But, I would say he also does have a rather inflated high opinion of himself that borders on arrogance. It just happens to be at least partially justified. > Joe: Sorry but I got the impression he was more interested in > maintaining his perhaps self appointed title than making a real impact > in people's lives. Shaun: Oh, no, he isn't. I'm sure he'd be annoyed if someone usurped his position - but he really is absolutely dedicated to his students academic needs. > Joe: Sorry but I am male and a former US marine. I have no problem > with a hard nosed approach to learning in many cases. The major > problem I have that makes me say that Snape is a terrible techer is > that he has only one approach. Shaun: Well, that's an interesting perspective, and it's one I agree with to some extent. We don't really see any evidence that Snape differentiates his teaching. But we also don't see any evidence that McGonagall differentiates her teaching. Or that Binns does. Or that Flitwick does. Or any other Hogwarts teacher for that matter. And, honestly, I would be moderately surprised if they did do much in the way of differentiation, given the model of school that Hogwarts is based on. It's a model that isn't that familiar to a lot of people today, and especially, I would say, not to most Americans (simply because this model did spread over much of the British Empire only after the US had successfully left that Empire). But it's a highly successful model of education in general terms. But it does have a specific flaw that it is very much sink or swim historically. The model is the class British Public School model. (Note - today, many of these schools most certainly do differentiate - but historically they didn't, and Hogwarts presents very strongly as a school based upon the historical model of such schools). I don't think the problem is with Snape, specifically here - it's a general problem that this type of school has. That the students are expected to adapt to the methods of the school, rather than the school adapt to the methods of individual students. We just don't see differentiation of teaching at Hogwarts. It doesn't have a 'Special Education' program or anything similar to that. Did Trelawney adapt her classes to suit Hermione? No, she didn't. When Neville expresses disbelief that he will do well in his exams, does McGonagall indicate she's going to adapt to his needs? No, she just tells him he needs more confidence - *HE* is the one who will have to change. Not her. Joe: > It is his JOB to teach as many students as possible as much > knowledge as possible and to do what is needed in each case. You can > say he acts like he does to help educate the students of Hogwarts but > if he were really concerned with every student then he would alter his > methods when he found that his original ideas were not working. Shaun: I'm not sure that I would say Snape is concerned with every single student. I think Snape is concerned with the performance of his students as a group. And I do think the evidence is that he teaches most of his students successfully. Neville is an exceptional case. Now, would I like to see a teacher reach out to the exceptional cases? Yes, I would. But not at the expense of every other child in their class. And if Snape's methods work for most of the class, then changing them for Neville would be at the expense of those other children. Joe: > But he doesn't alter them to fit the particular student. What he > does is totally destroy what potential exists in those that do not > respond to his teaching methods. It is his JOB to adapt his method to > maximize his effectiveness but he doesn't because he doesn't care. Shaun: 'Maximise his effectiveness'? There are twenty children in Snape's classes (at least that's the number that canon seems to indicate). If 19 of them are learning well, and one isn't, then changing the way the class is run to meet the needs of that one child over the needs of the other nineteen is not likely to be maximising his effectiveness. If one kids marks go up, and nineteen kids marks go down, that's not a more effective form of teaching. Now - probably it's not nineeteen kids. Maybe there's five kids in the class who particularly benefit from Snape's teaching style, fourteen who would do just as well with a different style, and one for whom the style is wrong. Even then, changing to meet that childs needs does not maximise the teachers effectiveness. it reduces it. One kid is now getting an education that better meets their needs - and five have lost access to something they were benefitting from. These things aren't zero sum equations. Changing a classroom to meet the needs of the lowest achieving student doesn't automatically have a beneficial effect, or even a neutral effect for every other child in the class. Don't get me wrong - I do think that kids who need special assistance should get that special assistance - and there's precious little sign that this happens at Hogwarts in any class. But you don't provide that assistance by changing the whole classroom to one targeted to their needs, from one that was already addressing the needs of other students in the class. People want to argue that Neville deserves more help than he gets - I'd be behind them all the way. But the idea that a teacher who may be teaching 95% of their students succcessfully should change their methods away from those that are working for 95% to those that would work for 5% is not one that I think makes any sense. I think Neville should get extra help, somehow, outside of Snape's classes. But the whole class cannot and should not be changed just for him. Nor should the teacher. Bear in mind that Snape is just one teacher - and Potions is just one class. I would be utterly horrified if every teacher at Hogwarts was like Snape. That would be an absolute disaster for a student like Neville. They wouldn't learn anything at all. But one class among many... Out of the dozens of teachers I had as a child (and I did have dozens because I attended a fairly large number of schools) less than half a dozen were at all Snape like. They constituted about half the teachers I learned well from. Even in the last few years of my schooling, where I was finally getting something like the education I needed, less than half my teachers in any given year were meeting *my* needs as a student. I still had to endure at least one or two classes every year that were completely and totally *wrong* for me. But the fact that I had *some* that were right for me, was at least something. My schooling went from being a total hell to periods of good and periods of bad. And that was fine. If there hadn't been these Snapes in my school - I wouldn't have had anywhere near the amount of 'good' experiences I had. But they were still a minority of my experiences. And that might be why I put so much store in them. Because they were so rare. For Neville - for the other students at Hogwarts - Snape is on teacher. Potions is one class. A *lot* of people going through their schooling have to deal with a lot worse than *one* teacher and *one* class that isn't right for them. A child has ten teachers - nine of whom teach classes in a way that is good for him or her, and one who teaches classes in a way that is bad for him or her. Another child in the same school has the same ten teachers. Nine of whom teach classes in a way that is bad for him or her, and one who teaches classes in a way that is good for him or her. And that one in both cases is the same teacher. Just different kids with different needs. Take away that one teacher and replace him or her with another one who is similar to the other nine - the ones you have decided are good teachers. Have you really made much difference to the kid who was already had nine teachers who were meeting their needs? Because I can tell you - you've probably made an incredible difference to the child who's just lost the only teacher that was given them anything at all. > Shaun: > Stress improves learning in males - but impairs it in females (again, this is > a generalisation - Sax actually devotes quite a bit of time towards the end of > his book looking at some reasons why the generalisations are not always true, > but as generalisations they do work). > > The point is though - that gender may make a difference here to the way some > of us are seeing Snape's teaching style. > > Joe: > Hogwarts isn't a normal school either. It is almost a hybrid of > normal school and vocational school. In it's vocational aspect > Snape's JOB is to train people to be able to use Potions in > certain professions and to attract students to want to consider a > career in Potions. Shaun: Again, that's an interesting perspective - but I think it's a rather American one to be honest. I would never describe Hogwarts as a vocational school - it is very much, in my view, modelled on the British Public Schools (and I have gone into a lot of detail as to why I hold that view at other times - http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/HSWW.html ) and these were not vocational schools. Yes, some of their students went straight from school into a career and they sought to equip them for those careers, but that didn't make them vocational schools. This is a very particular model of school that really isn't as well known or understood in the United States as in other English speaking countries, again because the US had left the British Empire before the explosion of these schools in the mid-nineteenth century (some of these schools are older than that - far older but that was the period when most of their 'modern' characteristic developed). They are not typical schools - only a relatively small minority of children attend them - but it's far from a vocational model. On 17 May 2006 at 14:34, tbernhard2000 (Dan) wrote: > Shaun wrote: > > > But I do know that a teacher can have all the appearances of Snape > (and more) and really still have his students in mind. Dan: > This is not disciplinarianism we're talking about, though, but in > class prejudice against certain students. Was your teacher afraid of > any of the boys parents, as in a Lucius Malfoy? Did he have a pet, as > in Draco? These are the things that stick out for me... Shaun: Actually I think this teacher probably was afraid of certain boys parents yes - the main boy who bullied me that year was the son of a prominent barrister, who gave a lot of money to the school (fortunately he was nothing like Lucius Malfoy - when he eventually found out what his son was doing, he was decidedly *unimpressed*). Did he have a teachers pet? Yes, he did. So did a lot of teachers - the ones I encountered who were best at playing favourites were the ones that I've described as the 'fluffy bunny' teachers. And I certainly don't think teachers should have pets, but it is separate from their general teaching styles. It's a mistake any teacher can make, regardless of how they teach. But really, with Snape, I don't see a prejudice against certain students. I see a prejudice against Harry Potter, specifically, but that is a very specific and special case based on bad experiences with Harry's father. Special cases always complicated things. Shaun: > > When I first encountered this man, I was a clinically depressed 13 > year old who cried at the drop of a hat > Dan: > Thank you for the personal perspective. I've read it numerous times on > this list. It identifies your argument as substantially a personal > testimonial, though, and the differences from Rowling's work are > evident. Harry is not clinically depressed, for example. Shaun: The point is, Dan, that I was made that way by teachers. My depression didn't develop out of nowhere - it was a product of very bad educational experiences. Experiences that came at the hands of teachers who I think most of the people who dislike Snape as a teacher, probably would have praised as being ideal teachers. They were sweet, they were kind, they were gentle. And they seem to have taught most of the kids in their classes well. They were just wrong for me. (As it happens, I think there's quite a good chance, Harry is clinically depressed when he starts at Hogwarts, though only mildly - but I was actually comparing myself to Neville here - emotionally my initial reactions to this man were similar to his to Snapes - though I think internally I handled them differently from Neville, which is why I got over them). Is my argument a personal one? Yes, in a very real sense it is. But I work with other kids who'd have had very similar experiences to my own. And I have taught kids like that. This is not a unique experience. Some kids just do not flourish in the type of classroom environment that others do flourish in. Some need the bunnies. Some need the Snapes. > > I can't demonstrate this statistically but I do have the impression > that most of those who express a dislike for Snape *as a teacher* on > this list are female, and most of those who express support for his > teaching style as valid are male. > > Shaun, this is impossible to say. I'm male, and I think Snape is a > nasty cow. We CAN say that most of the people on the list are female. > My own impression is that more men hate Snape, in fact. Not ALL of > this can be attributed to the Rickman effect. :) Shaun: I'm not talking about whether people like or dislike Snape (-8 I'm talking about whether or not people like or dislike Snape's teaching style. There's a *big* difference between the two. Some of the teachers who crippled me with their teaching were very nice people. The woman who did me the most damage and almost killed me broke down on my mother's shoulders when she was finally convinced of what she'd done. She was a lovely lady, and if I'd met her outside of a classroom, I'm sure I would have liked her a lot. And with regards to my Snape-like teachers - there's only one of them that I could say I liked. As a child I hated two of them - that's receded over time but I still don't like them. There's a big difference between liking a person as a person and liking or disliking their style of teaching. A big difference. But I certainly can't prove my impressions as I said - it might be interesting at some point to set up a survey on this, and there may actually be a reason to do so when I'm writing my thesis. But it is my impression. Dan: > And the context for "working well" really defies analysis - I'm > certain the lives of adolescents are affected by their teachers in > countless ways - does the study say, for example, that it works well > with boys because they internalize the criticism differently, and act > out against, for instance, other boys at recess? These studies are > quite silly, at some point. Look at the internal processing of Harry > after using the frightening slasher curse in HBP - he's not > internalizing Snape's voice, but remembering a voice we've heard long > before - he internal ethical compass, as it were. I'd trust that with > my life more than some side-effect of a disciplinary teaching style. Shaun: Well, no, it doesn't defy analysis. These things are studied extensively, and while it's moderately tricky to design studies that really address the issues you want to address, it is done quite routinely. And if you don't study them, all you wind up with is gut calls based on your own experiences - and those are so individual. I'm going to be teaching full time inside a year. Would people really want me basing my teaching entirely on my gut calls and own experiences? (-8 But working out what it happens - that's where you do get controversy. Some people think it's a genuine biological difference. Others think it's cultural. Many thinks it's a combination. They do look in detail to try and work out why these differences occur. It's not enough that they just say that they do. And it's not one study by the way - a quick count through Sax's footnotes reveals at least six studies he used on sex differences and this issue, in writing this section of his book. Dan: > Again, as you identify, we would need to define our terms much more > clearly. Learning math? Learning how to instruct others? Learning what > is good or bad? When is humiliation good, or when does it work in > instruction? What part of teaching is the instruction in so-called > facts and what is the passing along of beliefs about reality, that may > be different in 10 years? Which students strive to grasp the > transient, and which are focussed where on something less passing, > like literature, say? Who has stress at home, in the dorms? What is > the nature of the external stresses affecting each student? How does > that mix with Snape's teaching? Etc. etc. Shaun: Sure, all these things are valid fodder for study. And quite a few of them have been studied, though I doubt all of them have. It is a complicated thing - but the point is, because it's complicated, people going around and simply saying things like 'Snape is a bad teacher' seem to me to be making awfully simplistic statements about a very complicated issue. And very few people seem to call them or that. I get called on it, apparently, for taking the opposite position - and there's no reason I shouldn't be - but there seems to be a largely uncritical acceptance of the 'Snape-as-bad-teacher' thesis. And I don't think it's that simple, and, in fact, I think its potentially damaging. Dan: > Well, the fact that males learn better with stress-producing teachers > than girls doesn't mean ANYTHING about how men and women appreciate > any particular style of teaching. These are separate things. Shaun: Actually it means a lot to some of us. It may not mean anything to you, but it certainly does to me. I base my appreciation on a teachers style of teaching largely on whether or not it is effective. And if it is effective for me, it's very easy for me to see that style as effective (if it's not effective for me, I need to look deeper and see if it's effective for anyone else - and I do endeavour to do that - but if it worked for me, I don't need to look for external evidence that it can effective). If a higher proportion of males than females know from their own experiences that such teaching worked for them, it's going to be much more likely that they see it as a valid style - because people do give their own experiences a special primary in forming their opinions, and most don't look much deeper than that. Most people don't need to - most people have no need to know the intricacies of pedagogical style in their daily life. On 17 May 2006 at 17:51, houyhnhnm102 wrote: > houyhnhnm: > > I think class expectations and age both play a part, too. I went to > working class elementary schools, then I was in the honors program in > high school with a lot of kids from the other side of the tracks. > The teachers I had for honors classes were all very confrontational > and demanding. They were all either Snapes or McGonagalls. You could > be ripped apart in front the whole class for turning in mediocre > work. The conclusion from my own experience is that "socialization" > (=compliance) is the expectation for working class and low income > kids (and for females!) Academic excellence is only expected from > rich kids (because they have to get into good universities). And too > often, in math and science, only from males. Academic excellence > requires tough, demanding teachers. Shaun: I think there may well be a lot of truth in this. I encountered the Snape-like teachers at a school that is regarded as one of Australia's most prestigious, and 'elite' independent schools, and which does see it as part of its mission to create society's leaders. I come from a working class background and up until I went to this school, my education had been in very working class schools - not underresourced schools or 'bad schools' or anything like that - they were quite well equipped, but the kids came from working class areas. And the attitudes in the schools were different. houyhnhnm: > I would also like to point out that none of the students at Hogwarts > are "children" in terms of their stage of intellectual development. > Even the first years, at 11 years of age, are already in early > adolescence and, therefore, transitional between concrete and formal > thinking (assuming they are like Muggles in their intellectual > development which I think is a reasonable assumption. If anything I > would expect Wizard children to be a little on the precocious side). Shaun: Ack - you had to bring Piagetian levels into it (-8 (Sorry - I've just had to do a major assignment bringing them in obsessively and part of the reason I am active on the list again is to try and recover from that!). But, yes, I think this is relevant. The students at Hogwarts are undergoing their secondary education. Our indications are that there is no university system in the Wizarding World, though there does seem to be further training in some areas. There's no 'middle school mentality' of the type that pervades American education, and which for good or ill is spreading into other school systems around the English speaking world which treats early adolescence as time where children are almost in a holding pattern with regards to their education and only puts the pressure back on when they hit 14 or 15. From the age of 11, these children (and I think they are children although I use the term somewhat differently from a lot of people and it doesn't have the same connotations for me as many people seem to give it) are into the most important stage of their education. What they learn matters. They are part of a society that has decided that 11 year olds are old enough to be away from their mothers, to be sent to an isolated school, where quite frankly, adult supervision seems to be rather limited and only there as a last resort. This isn't a society obsessed with the emotional health and development of its children. I don't think they view it as unimportant, but I think they assume that it will handle itself for the most part, and you don't need to base everything you do on ensuring it for the minority who might have problems. That may not be a good thing - as other features of the Wizarding World may not be a good thing either - but it is the way that things seem to be. This is a school where 11 year olds are left largely to their own devices outside the classroom. This is a school where 11 year olds serving a detention can find themselves going into a forest where a half giant finds it necessary to carry a weapon when entering. Hogwarts isn't a creche. It is a school. It is *the* school. Where Wizarding Britain gets its leaders from. A small society hidden away inside a much larger one probably can't afford to have too many weak links. It can't afford to coddle its children. And more than that - this is a society between two wars. Between two periods of terror. Dumbledore as Headmaster is planning for the second war from the moment the first war ends. This is a school with a Headmaster who believes that evil is out there and will return and the children in his care are going to have to deal with that. There isn't time to coddle these children, nice though that would be. Whatever else happened to Neville Longbottom, the overriding truth is this. That no matter how much damage might have been done to his psyche in Snape's classes, Hogwarts has helped to produce a 15 year old boy who, with his face smashed in, and a borrowed wand in a trempling hand *STILL* runs towards the Death Eaters. A 15 year old boy who held in the grip of the Death Eaters, faced with the threat of the agonising curse that sent his parents insane, is still fighting and still telling Harry not to give the Death Eaters what they want to save him. This is a boy who should have been coddled? "'It's time you learned the difference between life and dreams, Potter.' said Malfoy. 'Now give me the prophecy, or we start using wands.' "'Go on then,' said Harry, raising his own wand to chest height. As he did so, the five wands of Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and Luna rose on either side of him.'" (OotP, p.690). This is the type of children that Hogwarts produces. 14 and 15 year olds ready to die to fight evil. Faced with evil, they will do what they can - until they can not. 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 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu May 18 01:10:44 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 01:10:44 -0000 Subject: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152398 Shaun wrote: > > But I do know that a teacher can have all the appearances of > > Snape (and more) and really still have his students in mind. Dan: > But Shaun, it's not just appearences of Snape that we have - it's > actions - Rowling goes a great length to show that Snape can accuse > wrongly, while still being close to the mark. Shaun: > > 'He demanded the best of everyone.' ****** ****** is also > > remembered as a strict disciplinarian." Dan: > This is not disciplinarianism we're talking about, though, but in > class prejudice against certain students. Was your teacher afraid > of any of the boys parents, as in a Lucius Malfoy? Did he have a > pet, as in Draco? These are the things that stick out for me... SSSusan: Dan! So good to see you post again! And it's nice that you've raised the issue I was interested in raising as well. ;-) Shaun, you know that education is near and dear to my heart as well, since I'm a former high school social studies teacher, have a school counseling degree and am a current school board member. For me the Snape traits of holding students to extremely high standards and brooking no goofing off and expecting a respect for the subject matter and the instructor are all FINE. Hell, they're more than fine. They're DANDY, too. You mentioned in your post wondering if people think students like you *don't matter* when they criticize a Snape or a Snape-like teacher. Heavens, no, it's not that! Not for me, at least. I think what it is is wondering if **all** of the "Snapely" traits were ones which you needed and appreciated?? I mean, those things I mentioned in the previous paragraph, as well as that "in-your-face" confrontation when you deserved a good dressing down for behavior or for not achieving to your abilities, are things I *do* understand when you speak of your Snape-like teachers. But did these teachers also display FAVORITISM [Draco/Slyths]? Did they hold open GRUDGES against students [Harry]? Were they sometimes MEAN when it wasn't called for [Hermione's teeth]? I am not saying Snape is constantly guilty of doing all of these things (nor that Harry never deserved dressing down!), but I think even those who tend to defend Snape will agree that he's certainly had his moments of unfairness. THAT'S the part of Snape that I object to, and THAT'S the part of your saying you've appreciated and needed Snape-like teachers that has, yes, left me a little incredulous. Do you mean *that* part of the package, too? And if you do, would you mind explaining how open favoritism/prejudice, how differential treatment of students (and I don't mean in teaching STYLE but in flat-out meanness towards some but not all) can be beneficial? I don't ask that to be *challenging* you, because I didn't live your experience; only you can speak to that. But I ask it to get it out on the table, because that is the part of the presentation of "Snape Teachers Can Be Good" that I don't grasp. Shaun: > > I can't demonstrate this statistically but I do have the > > impression that most of those who express a dislike for Snape > > *as a teacher* on this list are female, and most of those who > > express support for his teaching style as valid are male. SSSusan: A fascinating possibility, Shaun. Though... Dan: > Shaun, this is impossible to say. I'm male, and I think Snape is a > nasty cow. SSSusan: ... so it would be interesting to actually assess this somehow. Shaun: > > Stress improves learning in males Dan: > Again, as you identify, we would need to define our terms much more > clearly. Learning math? Learning how to instruct others? Learning > what is good or bad? SSSusan: And I would add that one might also need to define "stress." What FORM of stress improves learning? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who sincerely hopes she comes across as curious, not as critical. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 00:57:43 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 00:57:43 -0000 Subject: Snape, Snape, always Snape! (was Re: Amortentia and re The morality of love pot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152399 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > > > Nobody except *maybe SNAPE*? Just the meanest professor this side > of Muggleland, Snape? > > Okay, admittedly he may or may not have cold-bloodedly murdered > Dumbledore, but still! Why, oh why, must poor Snape be so horribly > demonized compared to the other true monsters in the WW? > I think Alla meant no one of the people who are not obviously and admittedly servants of Voldemort. With, of course, the exception of Snape. Why Snape? Oh my goodness! Well, I think it is because he is a sadistic, systematic, and constant abuser of children. Not to mention a traitor and murderer (even if he was doing what DD wanted). Lupinlore From cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com Thu May 18 00:53:55 2006 From: cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com (cleverestwitchofherage) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 00:53:55 -0000 Subject: a new? topic Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152400 Okay, here goes. I haven't haven't had time to read everything written since HBP came out, so if this is not a new topic, I apologize. Does anybody else wonder when or how the Vanishing Cabinet broke? I find the fact that the two cabinets form a secret passage from B&B to Hogwarts highly interesting and perhaps significant. Lord V once worked at B&B, after all. Was the cabinet broken then? If not, might he have used it to sneak into Hogwarts? What, if any, connection might there be between his attempt to gain a teaching position at Hogwarts and the fact that at one time a passage, apparently unknown to Dumbledore, existed between the two cabinets? I also wonder why Voldemort had his Death Eaters positioned in Hogsmeade when he went to ask Dumbledore for the teaching job. I realize that I might seem to be bringing up more than one topic here, but I think they are all connected. I also suspect that the last horcrux is at Hogwarts and that the final confrontation will take place there. Harry will, therefore, have to return to school. Any thoughts? Cleverwitch From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 00:50:30 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 00:50:30 -0000 Subject: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152401 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Lately most of the posts on this list have involved attacking or at > least passing judgment on certain characters, primarily Merope and > other female characters (and, of course, Snape and Dumbledore). Rather > than imposing our own standards of behavior and morality on people who > have no way of knowing what postmodern Muggles think is right or wrong > and probably would not care if they did know, or arguing about which > is worse, Ginny's immature hostility to Fleur or Fleur's tactless > indifference to the family's tastes in food and music, can we try to > come up with some new ideas that actually help us find meaning in the > books? Not Horcruxes, please, unless someone can find something new to > say about them. I could talk about foreshadowing and narrative > technique, but I'd probably put everyone to sleep. > > Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and > immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own > lives and social views? > But that is where ALL meaning comes from, our own lives and social views. The books, or any books, have absolutely no meaning in and of themselves. They are only bits of processed wood, bound together and splotched with ink. The characters only have meaning in that they reflect or antagonize the real world. They have no life or content or message or meaning or power, otherwise. They do not in any way exist except as they are granted meaning by readers -- and readers ALWAYS grant meaning from their own lives and beliefs and views and experiences. The plea that the characters do not know anything about modern muggle morality is, I think, beside the point. The characters do not know anything because they are not real. Wizards don't exist. Muggles don't exist, either, in that that is a category defined in opposition to wizards. WE are the real ones. WE are the ones that exist. WE are the ones whose views and experiences and beliefs are important, NOT imaginary characters described by the aforesaid ink splotches. Therefore, I would say, the ONLY possible meaningful discussion is about our own beliefs and experiences as reflected through the characters. The ONLY meaningful discussions, I think, are those that relate to the heartfelt themes of justice and revenge and love and family and all those other things that illuminate our own lives and that we bring to those ink splotches. Absent that sort of bringing the real world to the text, and our own experiences and beliefs, then all those ink blotches have, I think, no power whatsoever. The beliefs of the characters are, I think, of no importance at all. The culture of the characters is, I think, of no importance at all, in and of itself. The world of the wizards is, I think, totally worthless, in and of itself, because it is not real. Nothing about it exists. Its only worth lies in its relation to US, the real and existing readers, who breath life into the characters as having relationship to our world. Our world is, I think, always and forever the ONLY important one. And absent that connection to the real world, the only IMPORTANT world, then I think any kind of search for meaning in these or any other books must be futile. Lupinlore From lisa_croke at yahoo.com.au Thu May 18 01:26:14 2006 From: lisa_croke at yahoo.com.au (Lisa Croke) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 01:26:14 -0000 Subject: a new? topic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152402 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cleverestwitchofherage" wrote: > Does anybody else wonder when or how the Vanishing Cabinet broke? I > find the fact that the two cabinets form a secret passage from B&B > to Hogwarts highly interesting and perhaps significant. Lord V once > worked at B&B, after all. Was the cabinet broken then? If not, might > he have used it to sneak into Hogwarts? What, if any, connection > might there be between his attempt to gain a teaching position at > Hogwarts and the fact that at one time a passage, apparently unknown > to Dumbledore, existed between the two cabinets? I'm not absolutely positive about this, but I THINK that Nearly Headless Nick persuaded Peeves to smash the Vanishing Cabinet over Filch's office to distract him, so that Harry wouldn't get into trouble. I can't remember which book it was in, but Harry had just come in dripping mud after a Quidditch practice. I can't remember any more than that. aussiehpnut From celizwh at intergate.com Thu May 18 02:43:43 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 02:43:43 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152403 Steven: > > > Often through the books little details later turn out > > > to be important. I was wondering, why did JKR take pains > > > to make it clear that levicorpus is a nonverbal spell? > > > It could be a meaningless detail, but maybe not. I have > > > a guess. Maybe this has been thought of before, but > > > anyway, at the end of HBP Snape says "You dare use my > > > own spells against me, Potter? It was I who invented > > > them ... you'd turn my inventions on me, like your > > > filthy father ..." So we know James used the Spell, > > > and we know that Snape invented it. How did James > > > learn the spell? Since its nvbl, he did not hear > > > Snape say it and copy him. He could only have learned > > > it from the HBP potions book. How did he get his hands > > > on Snape's potions book? Snape was sharing it with Lily, > > > which accounts for Slughorn's repeated references to her > > > potions ability. Kim: > > I wonder about the reference to Harry's "filthy father" > > using Levicorpus, though. Snape says that he invented > > the spells (plural) and that Harry's father turned his > > inventions (again plural) on him. Is he referring to > > the spell Harry had just flung at Snape or was he > > referring to other spells that James may have heard > > Snape use outloud? Steven: > I'm pretty sure this was right after Harry tried to > use levicorpus. houyhnhnm: ********************* "Sectum--!" Snape flicked his wand and the curse was repelled yet again; but Harry was mere feet away now and he could see Snape's face clearly at last: He was no longer sneering or jeering; the blazing flames showed a face full of rage. Mustering all his powers of concentration, Harry thought, Levi-- "No, Potter!: screamed Snape. There was a loud BANG and Harry was soaring backward.... ********************* After hearing Harry attempt to use Sectumsempra, Snape was no longer sneering or jeering, but he was still flicking. It seems it *was* the attempted use of Levicorpus, that put Snape over the top. We don't *know* that Snape and Lily were friends or even lab partners. She could have come to his defense in the pensieve scene because she was a kind-hearted girl or because she was using Snape as a prop in a sort of approach-avoidance flirtation with James. I like the idea, though. I like the idea that Snape charmed his potions book so that only Lily's eyes could read the glosses. (I think it was Catlady who intoduced that idea.) Was the pensieve incident the first occasion on which James turned Snape's invention on him? Then, it is likely he would have assumed that Lily had betrayed his secrets. No wonder he called her a mudblood. What if he was wrong? Maybe that incident really was Snape's worst memory because he turned an innocent Lily into an enemy on that day. I can't think of any other spells that are exclusively non-verbal. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 02:43:35 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 02:43:35 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152404 > Magpie: > If Tom did realize that this > wasn't love he was feeling, because it didn't feel good, if he's > suffering anything like obsession a cold shower is useless. The > only way he can stop suffering is to be with Merope. It could feel > very much like being enslaved. Alla: Well, yes, I agree, BUT I am having even bigger problem on Tom "should have been able to not act on his obsession" argument. Yes, Love potion produces obsession, but um, how do we know that the person who drank Love potion is able to distingush between the two. I mean, yes, the outside observer ( whoever that was initially who created the Love potions, or somebody who tested them, etc) made that conclusion, but for all we know person under the influence of Love potion indeed thinks that he IS in love. And we HEARD from Ron that he thinks that he is in love with Romilda as Pippin pointed out earlier. Pippin also argued that Ron was not sure, but I saw no evidence that Ron was thinking that he feels something else, not love. And how could he? His judgment was impaired and Harry, if I may, does not take any chances, does not let Ron to decide for himself, he treats it as if Ron was poisoned, IMO. And he IMO indeed was drugged and badly hurt. Magpie: > The love potion is described as being the most dangerous Potion in > Slughorn's classroom iirc and, as others have pointed out, we don't > even know if it was a Love Potion. It seems like it was since DD > says it was, but I don't think Harry's suggestion of Imperius is > supposed to just be wrong, it's a significant answer showing how the > two are so similar. Alla: Not to turn it into another singing praises to Harry reply, but I think that Harry has an instictive ability to spot Dark magic sometimes. I think it will grew in book 7 and we may even see Harry pulling something similar to what Dumbledore did in the cave. So, yeah, I am inclined to give some weight to Harry characterising Love potions as Dark and comparing to Imperio. Oh, and of course not saying that Harry is like DD or that he never tried unforgivables or anything like that, just thinking that those could be hints of Harry strong abilities to deal with Dark magic, which may help him dealing with Horcruxes. JMO, Alla From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu May 18 03:09:14 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 03:09:14 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Whatever_happened_to_the_Prince=92s_potions_book=3F_(was:_Request_for_new_topics)?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152405 Neri: > What happened to Prince's potions book since Harry had hidden it in > the RoR, and where is it now? The answer seems obvious to me ? Draco > has it. > > The skeleton in the cage is probably the Hand of Glory. Why else would > it have five "legs"? Draco must have hidden it there, near the > Vanishing Cabinet he was working on, in preparation for his final > operation, and also because this would be by far the best hiding place > at Hogwarts for such a Dark object. zgirnius: Or, it could be a dead Quintaped, a an extremely dangerous Magical Creature (XXXXX rating) confined (allegedly) to a single island off the coast of Scotland which has been rendered Unplottable to protect unwary Muggles. I'd think Harry would recognize the skeleton of a human hand...What a Quintaped would be doing there? Maybe a less successful pet of Hagrid's than Aragog? Neri: > Draco would probably conclude that it was Harry who had hidden the > book there (maybe only the sixth year NEWT class use these textbooks ? > that would certainly limit the number of suspects) especially if he > finds the Sectumsempra spell. And he would immediately conclude that > this was the secret behind Harry's success in potions. Would he also > figure out that it was Snape's? And if so, which of Snape's schooldays > secret are in there that Draco might find interesting? zgirnius: This actually brings up the question of what Draco will be up to in Book 7. He can hardly stroll down Knockturn Alley and enter the shop during regular business hours to retrieve his things. I tend to think he will be with Snape (that lack of qualifiers in the second clause of the Unbreakable Vow...) From brahadambal at indiatimes.com Thu May 18 03:14:34 2006 From: brahadambal at indiatimes.com (latha279) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 03:14:34 -0000 Subject: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152406 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jlv230" wrote: > > Here's what I've been thinking about recently... First, from the > Mugglenet/Leaky JKR interview: > > "ES: Dumbledore is unrivalled in his knowledge of magic ? > "JKR: Mmhm. > "ES: Where did he learn it all? > "JKR: I see him primarily as someone who would be self-taught. > However, he in his time had access to superb teachers at Hogwarts, > so he was educated in the same way that everyone else is educated. > Dumbledore's family would be a profitable line of inquiry, more > profitable than sweet wrappers." > > My question is why have we not actually been introduced to > Aberforth? We only see him, through Harry's eyes, as `the barman of > the Hog's Head'. We know he was in the Order, and we are told that > he is a rather seedy character (goats shudder), but why has Harry > not discovered who he is? > > Harry saw him in the Order's photo, albeit briefly, and sees him > again in the Hog's Head in OotP: > > "The barman...was a grumpy-looking old man with a great deal of long > grey hair and beard. He was tall and thin and looked vaguely > familiar to Harry." > > Harry does not realise it is the same man, despite having seen a > photo of him in his younger days. > > Then look at HBP ch.12 for example: > > "One was very tall and thin; squinting through his rain-washed > glasses Harry recognised the barman who worked in the other > Hogsmeade pub, the Hog's Head. As Harry, Ron and Hermione drew > closer, the barman drew his cloak more tightly around his neck and > walked away, leaving the shorter man to fumble with something in his > arms." > > Why make a point of the fact that Harry can hardly see the guy what > with the rain on his glasses and the cloak and the walking away? Is > it important that Harry is unaware of the barman's family > connection? What might be in store for Aberforth given that JKR > hinted that Dumbledore's family had an interesting history? Are > Dumbledore and Aberforth 'heirs of Gryffindor' or somesuch? Or is > that just silly? > > Anyway, makes a change... > JLV xx > Brady: This is a welcome change :) BTW, if Harry cn't see clearly with his glasses, why are we assuming that the person he saw was Aberforth and not DD himself?? Why would Dung be fumbling with something if it was not fear of DD?? Harry thought he recognises him as the barman, but the distance and the rain on his glasses can definitly make DD look like the barman, can't they? Just my tuppence. Brady. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Thu May 18 03:20:59 2006 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 03:20:59 -0000 Subject: FILK: Shop Song Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152407 Shop Song To the tune of Cop Song, from Urinetown Dedicated to Constance Vigilance There is a MIDI, but not a very good one: http://www.hamienet.com/midi22232.html A 30-second excerpt of the song can be heard at Amazon: http://tinyurl.com/rgcvg THE SCENE: Diagon Alley, before Madam Malkin's. Enter the Trio HARRY (spoken) If there's one thing I've learned in my many years of shopping in Diagon Alley, it's that the journey down to Diagon is no bargain. Not even from the very toughest amongst us. On that journey expect only expectorations. (music) So that day we made our way to Malkin's Then they saw us walk in, with DA brawn The pure-bloods, purchasin' duds Makin' slurs of mud front of me and Ron RON He's so pathologically into crud Voldy's number one bud, DE spawn His Mum's cold, sleazy way of talkin' Slytherins a-squawkin' in Diagon HARRY & RON Narcissa Malfoy Bought new dress robes for her boy Too bad our army helped destroy HARRY Lou's ploy RON What joy! NARCISSA But Lily Potter's son May call himself the Chosen One Shouldn't try a curse if I am here Or I will guarantee he'll be undone! DRACO There are those who socialize With mongrels - NARCISSA Hang out with the wrong girls - DRACO A shock and shame, but as we uphold The pride of wizards - NARCISSA Followers of his word - DRACO Who's not named! Our task: help defeat the Order - NARCISSA Not to mention Potter - DRACO We'll crush and maim, for one day soon Dumbledore won't aid you NARCISSA Then I am afraid you'll DRACO & NARCISSA Have lost the game! Her-me-ownee G. Homely, gaunt and bony, she Caught without her crony, we DRACO DEs - NARCISSA DC'd! HARRY & RON And Draco Malfoy's dad Hoosegow-held because he's bad Needs his wife to bail him out Who'll soon in convict clothes be clad! HARRY (looking mockingly around the shop) Don't see any Dumbledore here Why not start your war here, double dare! Despite Slytherin aggression, Pardon the expression, we don't scare! That's why we will keep our wands raised As you two go on crazed, evil blondes If a fight is what you're after We're convulsed with laughter ? so bring it on! (A few tense moments of silence, as the antagonists raise their wands a bit higher) RON Narcissa Malfoy NARCISSA Lily Potter's son DRACO Her-me-ownee G. NARCISSA Lily Potter's son HARRY Narcissa Malfoy RON And Draco Malfoy's dad HERMIONE & MADAM MALKIN (to the Gryffindors and Slytherins, respectively) Don't fight with them! Don't fight with them!, etc. (The next three stanzas are sung as a round, climaxing in the fourth and final stanza which is sung in unison) HARRY On this day we Made our way to Malkin's And they saw us walk in With DA brawn Our purebloods Purchasin' duds Makin' slurs of mud Front of me and Ron RON On this day we Made our way to Malkin's And they saw us walk in With DA brawn Our purebloods Purchasin' duds Makin' slurs of mud DRACO & NARCISSA On this day they Made their way to Malkin's And we saw them walk in With DA brawn Our purebloods Purchasin' duds GRYFFINDORS/SLYTHERINS They're so pathologically into crud Voldy's/Dumble's number one bud, DE/DA spawn His Mum's/Their dumb cold, sleazy way of talkin' Slytherins/Gryffindors a-squawkin' in Diagon! (Exit, in righteous xenophobic disgust, NARCISSA & DRACO) - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu May 18 03:42:52 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 03:42:52 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152408 > > SSSusan, who cannot BELIEVE she's entering into this thread, says: > Steven1965aaa added: > I can't believe it either, but I just can't help myself... SSSusan: Heh. It happens around here, doesn't it? ;-) Steven1965aaa: > Yes, she was treated badly by her family, yes she was desperate due > to obsessive love, but that doesn't justify what she did. Yes, Tom > Sr. was hoodwinked, bewitched, slipped a mickey, etc., and he > certainly had no obligation to the person that did that to him, but > he still abandoned his kid. Neither of them come off as a > particularly good person. Hence their evil spawn. SSSusan: Oh, absolutely! When I wrote that post and discussed my belief that Tom Sr. had no legal or perhaps even moral obligation to Merope, I was speaking in terms of *spousal* obligations. I do think his not arranging for SOME kind of life for his unborn child was despicable. The pregnancy couldn't be undone. Merope admitted her ploy, stopped using the Love Potion, and Tom fled. She didn't exactly "undo" what had been done, but Tom was able to get out of it. The pregnancy, however, couldn't be undone or gotten out of. So, especially since Tom Sr. apparently had the financial means, I do think he should have made sure the child didn't STARVE to death. I'm glad you brought this up, because I did not address it earlier. SSSusan previously: > > I know people hate when this card is pulled, but... um... > > CHILDREN'S book, anyone? Is JKR going to use the term "rape" in a > > series where the farthest she's gone is "snogging"? (Nobody > > talking about getting to 3rd base; no pregnancies amongst the > > students.) To me "hoodwinked" is a safer term, in that *kids* > > might focus on "trickery," whereas adults might take it much more > > as a euphemism for a forced relationship. a_svirn: > Well, actually "hoodwinked" in this instance is neither "children- > proof" term, nor turn of phrase expressing being tricked into an > unwonted marriage. What Dumbledore actually says is that *villagers* > put such a construction on Tom Sr. words. He himself, however, ? > according to Dumbledore ? meant something else entirely: > > "You see, within a few months of their runaway marriage, 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' and 'taken in.' What *he* meant, I am sure, is > that he had been *under an enchantment* that had now lifted, though > I daresay he did not dare use those precise words for fear of being > thought insane. When *they* heard what he was saying, however, the > *villagers* guessed that Merope had lied to Tom Riddle, pretending > that she was going to have his baby, and that he had married her for > this reason" [emphasis mine a_svirn]. SSSusan: Thank you for providing the canon on the use of the word "hoodwinked," a_svirn. If Tom was saying "hoodwinked," and the villagers misunderstood it to mean Merope'd lied about having his baby, whereas he meant (but couldn't really say because he'd be considered nuts) that he'd been enchanted, it's still clear that the notions of sex & trickery have been introduced and brought together. And JKR penned "hoodwinked"; she elected to use that word. I think it can still serve to imply a more sexual component to the trickery than kids would pick up from reading it. Clearly the villagers assumed a sexual aspect to it, if DD's right. And, really, you went on to say: > So you see, it was his being "under an enchantment" that turned > Tom's world upside-down, not his being married to a socially > unacceptable girl. And being "under an enchantment" in this > instance means being sexually violated. So, although Tom > probably wasn't "ravished", there is no question that he was > violated. Even if he himself wouldn't use the word *rape*. SSSusan: ... which is really the issue. Whether it's "rape" or "hoodwinked," it's trickery and it's a *violation.* I totally agree with this! Siriusly Snapey Susan Siriusly Snapey Susan From AllieS426 at aol.com Thu May 18 04:28:09 2006 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 04:28:09 -0000 Subject: SHIP Harry/Ginny (was:CHPDISC: HBP14, Felix Felicis) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152409 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: >Why is it OK for Harry to > kill LV but not for Ginny to perform an Unforgiveable if it is > necessary to save someone's life? Is it really considered Dark Magic > under those circumstances? > Allie: Off the topic now :) - I don't think Harry will kill Lord Voldemort, at least not in the literal sense. And I do hope there are loopholes in the laws regarding unforgiveables. A short "imperio" for a noble reason (e.g. saving someone's life) doesn't seem something that should require a life sentence in Azkaban. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu May 18 05:02:03 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 05:02:03 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152410 Carol wrote: > Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and > immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own > lives and social views? SSSusan: You know, I've recently been bemoaning the fact, offlist to a couple of folks, that there seems to be a tendency to focus a LOT on real life morality when we discuss the Potterverse these days. That's not always a bad thing... it's certainly natural to draw parallels to the life we lead... but sometimes it almost seems like we just can't have FUN with the books and characters, can't JOSH about things, without a RL "standard" or "judgment" being handed down. ('Course, I tossed my two knuts into the Tom/Merope/Love Potion thread today by talking about grounds for Catholic annulment, so take my whining with a grain of salt. ;-)) I mean, would anyone dare suggest Snape is sexy here? Come on, tell the truth! Would anyone?? And I don't mean Rickman!Snape either. It *has* been done here before, you know, people talking about Snape being sexy and why.... But more to the point, I suppose, in listening to some folks talking about HP and the online forums, it struck me that a lot of people don't seem to write about the FUN they find in the books, the JOY of Harry Potter or JKR's world. So how 'bout it? Am I truly in a small minority of people who still really LIKES the Potterverse? still guffaws at some of JKR's clever turns of phrase? still marvels at her creativity? still shakes her head that this writer can have us arguing after SIX books about whether a character is evil, good, neither or both? Am I in a small minority of people who still actually LIKES Harry himself? ::huffs on D'oH shield and glances at it sentimentally:: How 'bout we -- without succumbing to a series of just one-liners -- talk about what we LOVE about the books? what we find FUN about them, even after all this time? By way of an example, I'll say that for me one of the things is the richness of the characterization. I know many argue that Super! Ginny popped out of nowhere, but I still think that in many ways what makes these books so fun is that the world JKR has built is so richly detailed, that she takes the time to give us so many conversations, so many snippets of day-to-day life, so much of a chance to get to know these characters, so that we RECOGNIZE them, feel we can anticipate some of the things they'll say & do on a daily basis. (Well, not SNAPE, of course, but he's her Special Case and too tied into the Mystery aspect of the series to count!) By way of another example, I love that Luna bugged the crap out of me in OotP but that Jo made me laugh out loud with this: "'And that's Smith of Hufflepuff with the Quaffle,' said a dreamy voice, echoing over the grounds. 'He did the commentary last time, of course, and Ginny Weasley flew into him, I think probably on purpose, it looked like it. Smith was being quite rude about Gryffindor, I expect he regrets that now he's playing them -- oh, look, he's lost the Quaffle, Ginny took it from him, I do like her, she's very nice....'" **** "'...but now that big Huffleupff player's got the Quaffle from her, I can't remember his name, it's something like Bibble -- no, Buggins --' 'It's Cadwallader!' said Professor McGonagall." **** "Then Cadwallader scored again, making things level, but Luna did not seem to have noticed; she appeared singularly uninterested in such mundane things as the score, and kept attempting to draw the crowd's attention to such things as interestingly shaped clouds and the possibility that Zacharias Smith, who had so far failed to maintain possession of the Quaffle for longer than a minute, was suffering from something called 'Loser's Lurgy.' 'Seventy-forty to Hufflepuff!' barked Professor McGonagall into Luna's megaphone. 'Is it, already?' said Luna vaguely. [HBP, "Elf Tails"] Hee. Anybody else game? Siriusly Snapey Susan From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Thu May 18 05:43:23 2006 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 05:43:23 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152411 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" wrote: > > Often through the books little details later turn out to be > important. I was wondering, why did JKR take pains to make it clear > that levicorpus is a nonverbal spell? great post snippage..... Doddie here: Well, knowing JKR's style....I wouldn't be surprised if Snape had created something like a DA group in his day......also, I wouldn't be surprised if the marauders had a spy in the group(Peter perhaps??)... (ahhh can you imagine how angry that would make Snape and why he may have removed the memories that Harry glimpsed into the pensive... (although I love the Lily/Snape thingy.....I think something more may motivate Severus. ) This would fit into the parallels between Harry and Snape....Can you imagine how angry Snape would be that Harry's DA group was more successful than his because he(Harry) put no limitations on who could join...(if Snape could create one....then being a member of slytherin he could/would only teach pure bloods.....) Talk about irony.....perhaps this is the reason why DD saw his true lament..(did dd miss the Lily/Snape connection entirely because of his own experience???)...Did Snape actually want to teach everyone like Harry was doing in OOP or only those he thought worthy?(most likely) Is this why DD made snape a teacher???? (is the hermione/snape interaction a clue to Snape's self loathing? How much of hisself does Snape see in Hermione?) And of course, nonverbal spells would mean the most in HBP......because this has been how Harry has learned so much of the info which will keep him and others alive, not by folks telling him what they thought was going on...but his instinct on what was happening.(Perhaps this is a massive clue) So why I hate Snape doesn't come into play....this is just some of my thought process as to why jkr placed snape/pp together in hbp..apparently it is significant to the plotline...(how could it not be?) And since no one can come to a conclusion on Snape....then we must ask ourselves...WHY PP would act as servant to Snape in HBP...especially after the POA episode.. Doddie (who is off to read yet again the shrieking shack episode....and then the entire book--after which I know I will be compelled to read all the library segments in the series..--all hail irma! LOL) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu May 18 05:51:05 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 05:51:05 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152412 I told myself that I was going to stay out of this one. But here I am. Let me present this whole situation from a different perspective. Let's look at the 2 young women Merope and Cecelia. Merope is plain, she is poor, sort of a Cinderella type. Cecelia is from a family of means. She is able to do as most young women do when they are tying to "catch" a young man. She can use makeup and fancy clothes and a nice hair style, some training in etiquette and advice from a more experienced older woman to tell her how to "win" the man of her dreams. Merope has none of that. All she has is magic. We don't know anything about the personality of either woman. But we can guess from Merope behavior that she is probably a gentle, kind person with a good soul. Otherwise she would be like her father and brother. She would have a Bella type personality. She wouldn't take any crap from her father and brother. Now what we see in Merope is the natural human need to be loved. Any normal person has that need. For illustration purposes let us assume that Cecelia has the same personality as Merope. The major difference between the two young woman (other than one is a Muggle and the other a Witch) is everything that is on the outside. All of the superficial things. What Merope really needs is a Muggle "makeover", like you see on TV. Then she can compete with Cecelia for the love of Tom Sr. like any other Muggle woman with money. But Merope is a witch, all she has is magic. So she makes a love potion. The love potion turns Cinderella into the charming Princess. And Tom falls for her. But unlike Cinderella where the Prince still loved her even when he sees her in her rags, dirty hair, etc. Tom Sr. does not love Merope when the potion wears off. He does not love Merope for the PERSON that she is. He only loved the superficial things that the love potion was able to produce. I think that this is the point that JKR is trying to make of all of this. In HBP we see all forms of love or attempts at love. Here we see a young woman who wants to be loved for herself alone. But the young man is only attracted to what is on the outside. Merope knows that she can not compete with the Muggle who has access to a different type of trickery (known to every Muggle woman) so Merope uses the only thing she can, magic a love potion. When she realizes that this is wrong, and perhaps by then she hopes that her husband will love her for herself alone she stops giving him the potion. And Tom Sr. shows his true colors. I don't think this is much different that a man who once his wife has a couple of kids and doesn't get dressed up for him like she use to, goes looking for someone else. I think that we are meant to feel sorry for Merope and to see Tom Sr. as a superficial young man. He is so bad in fact,(as our author tell us) that he not only leaves his young wife, but leaves knowing that she is pregnant. He abandons his child. (I listened to the CD version and it is a bit clearer on there that he probably did know.) Then we move on to the fact that every child has a right to be loved... and so on into a different thread about the sins of society producing a LV. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu May 18 06:34:38 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 06:34:38 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152414 I was listening to the CD of HBP and first I want to encourage everyone to get a copy from your local library and listen to it. Listening is so much better for finding the small details. Things just jumped out at me that I had forgotten. It is like a whole new book in places. Now while I was listening to the part where DD takes Harry to the cave, it occurred to me just how dangerous that place was. And I thought "wait a minute here is Harry the boy who must be kept safe by all means possible and DD is taking him to this very dangerous place". All I can come up with is that DD must have faith in his own ability to keep Harry safe no matter what happens there. But it does seem a bit strange on the surface. Seems a bit reckless. But I suppose that DD felt in control even if he didn't know what to expect. I know he wanted to teach Harry how to identify places that LV had been and get some practical experience in Horcrux hunting but still I guess being a wizard is just dangerous all around. Look how many times that they all end up in the hospital. It sure seems a lot more dangerous than the Muggle world. I wonder if Lily's protection is greater than we think. Maybe it protects Harry from being killed at all until he is 17. Or maybe DD saw the future... but he doesn't believe in that. So I am back to DD just having faith in his own ability or maybe ... maybe... in Fawkes?? If DD had died in the cave and Harry was left there, would Fawkes have come to save him? Just trying to figure out why DD would take Harry to such a dangerous place... Tonks_op From drednort at alphalink.com.au Thu May 18 06:38:40 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:38:40 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <446CA310.9311.105AF3A@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152415 On 18 May 2006 at 1:10, cubfanbudwoman (SSSusan) wrote: > Shaun, you know that education is near and dear to my heart as > well, since I'm a former high school social studies teacher, have a > school > counseling degree and am a current school board member. For me the > Snape traits of holding students to extremely high standards and > brooking no goofing off and expecting a respect for the subject > matter and the instructor are all FINE. Hell, they're more than > fine. They're DANDY, too. > > You mentioned in your post wondering if people think students like > you *don't matter* when they criticize a Snape or a Snape-like > teacher. Heavens, no, it's not that! Not for me, at least. I > think what it is is wondering if **all** of the "Snapely" traits > were ones which you needed and appreciated?? Shaun: A very interesting question, and one I will try to answer as well as I can. Just as I have started though, I noticed another message you've sent to the list about finding fun in the books. I might replay to that in more detail later, but I just wanted to say before I continue what will probably be quite a serious message, that I personally do find fun in the books in all sorts of ways - but this type of thing is fun for me as well. This type of analysis is stuff that I greatly enjoy. I should also say before continuing that I don't mind being challenged on this type of thing, because I can understand that people might find what I'm saying difficult to grasp if their experiences were very different from my own. My views are shaped by my experiences, and those of kids I know and work with - and if people have had different experiences, of course, they are likely to see things differently. But one thing I have had to learn in my own life looking back on my own childhood is that it's a mistake to judge whether something in education is a good or bad thing based only on your own experiences. Things that were good for me were probably bad for some other kids. Things that were bad for me were probably good for some other kids. And it took me a long time to realise that. SSSusan: > Do you mean *that* part of the package, too? And if you do, would > you mind explaining how open favoritism/prejudice, how differential > treatment of students (and I don't mean in teaching STYLE but in > flat-out meanness towards some but not all) can be beneficial? Shaun: Do I mean that part of the passage as well? Yes, and no. There are certainly things that Snape has done that I do not believe are good or justified. But the thing that is also true of just about every single teacher I had when I was a kid, both the good ones and the bad ones (my assessments). Teachers aren't perfect, they're not saints. Every teacher gets some things wrong sometimes even if they are brilliant teachers. One of my teachers (not one of the Snape like ones) won a National Excellence in Teaching Award a few years ago. She has been judged by her peers to be one of Australia's best teachers and I've no reason to argue with their assessment. But she did some pretty awful things to me when I was in her classes. Even the best teachers drop some real clangers occasionally Now, I've snipped out some of the paragraphs you wrote because I would have been quoting an awful lot otherwise, but I'm taking the liberty of taking sentences out one at a time to reply to each point you made: SSSusan: > But did these teachers also display FAVORITISM [Draco/Slyths]? Shaun: Yes, they did. And this is one area where I can't see anything wrong with doing this. Most teachers I can recall from my schooling had students who they favoured. Sometimes for good reason that was obvious to me. Sometimes for no reason that was obvious to me (although one may well have existed). It's human nature to have favourites among other people - and expecting teachers not to do this, is to me expecting teachers to be less than human. But the context matters. Snape is Draco's (and the Slytherin's) Head of House. As McGonagall points out in PS, the student's Houses, while they are at Hogwarts are the closest things they have to families. Their Head of House is the closest thing they have to a parent. And these are children. There's nothing wrong with that type of support being available. And that involves favouritism in one form or another. Snape is responsible for teaching potions to the students of Hogwarts. But his responsibility to the Slytherins is above and beyond that. He has a specific duty to them, because he is their Head of House. And trying to do that type of job without showing favouritism isn't exactly consistent. Some teachers have a greater responsibility to their students, or to particular students than others, by virtue of the position they hold. In that situation, I certainly don't see anything wrong with some degree of favouritism. Yes, the Gryffindors seem to believe that Snape favours his House and that McGonagall doesn't favour hers - and it's not impossible that they are right about that. But kids really aren't the best position to judge such things - I know we weren't when I was at school. You know, part of the reason my worst year of schooling was so bad for me is because the teacher who was supposed to be especially responsible for my welfare that year - my homeroom teacher - was the main cause of my problems. There was, by design, supposed to be a teacher with special responsibility for a particular student - the system broke down for me, because she was my major problem. When I changed schools at the end of that year, at each point of my schooling, our schools system gave us three teachers with special responsibility for us - our Form Master, our House Master, and our Tutor. In my first year at this school, I actually had one man filling all three of these positions for me simultaneously - because he decided he was the best suited to give me what I needed based on what he'd been told about me (I was a 'special case' due to my previous experiences) and he therefore made sure he was the one in my corner. Was that favouritism? You bet it was. But at the time I was utterly unaware of it. And it wasn't expressed in ways I found particularly comfortable at the time. Looking back as an adult, I can see what a friend that man was to me - at the time though, the suggestion he was favouring me would have made me collapse into gales of laughter. My point is that it is Snape's job to 'favour' the Slytherins to some extent. I may not agree with every aspect of how he does this, but I don't think it's a bad thing. Especially not in a boarding school, where the kids don't have parents there to give them special support if they need it. If you want to talk about favouritism causing problems, it's Slughorn's Slug Club that gives me far more cause for concern than what Snape does. Even that doesn't worry me incredibly - but it worries me more than Snape's actions. SSSusan: > Did they hold open GRUDGES against students [Harry]? Shaun: No, not that I am aware of. But then again, to the best of my knowledge, I didn't have a single teacher who had been bullied by a gang lead by the father of one of his students when they were at school together. I think Snape's treatment of Harry is unfair, and unjust. I also think Harry makes it worse over time by his attitude, but Snape did start it in my view, and he's an adult and Harry is a child, so he is responsible for it beginning, and he's most responsible for its continuation. But it is a very unusual and very specific situation. I've thought about what would happen if I found myself in the position of having the child one of my tormentors in a classroom some day. Especially one who looked so much like the person who bullied me. I hope I wouldn't have an issue with that child, but I honestly don't want to find out. SSSusan: > Were they sometimes MEAN when it wasn't called for [Hermione's > teeth]? Shaun: Very occasionally, yes, they were. And I hated them for it - and when one of them did it to one of my friends, unfortunately for me, he was able to hear very clearly what I called him and I paid a pretty high price for the things I said. And I still think what that man did was utterly unjustifiable. And I think that what Snape said about Hermione's teeth is also utterly unjustifiable. And if a teacher made a habit, of vicious and malicious and utterly uncalled for statements like that, then I would want him gone. But the thing is - I don't think Snape does. The Hermione's teeth incident, horrifying as it is, is one incident after four years - actually I'll just include a little quote to illustrate my point of view. "'Malfoy got Hermione!' Ron said. 'Look!' He forced Hermione to show Snape her teeth - she was doing her best to hide them with her hands, though this was difficult as they had now grown down past her collar. Pansy Parkinson and the other Slytherin girls were doubled up with silent giggles, pointing at Hermione from behind Snape's back. Snape looked coldly at Hermione, then said, 'I see no difference.' Hermione let out a whimper; her eyes filled with tears, she turned on her heel and ran, ran all the way up the corridor and out of sight." (GoF, p263). To me something very telling takes place in this little scene. After four years of knowing Snape, being taught by Snape, and actively hating Snape with a passion, Ron still seems to expect Snape to act appropriately to Hermione's condition. He knows Snape is nasty, and vindictive, and vicious and whatever other label you may want to put on him. And he still expects Snape to take appropriate action. Ron is not the type of person in my opinion to *underestimate* how nasty Snape can be. What Snape does in this case is utterly unexpected - even to students like Harry, and Ron, and Hermione who hate him. It's not a normal response. I do think what Snape does in that case is wrong. But I think that is an unusual case. I've read through all of Snape's interactions with his students quite carefully and in my view that one really does stand out for petty meanness with no apparent justification. And I don't like seeing a teacher do that. I don't think it's appropriate. I didn't think it was appropriate when it was done to my friend either when I was at school. And *if* there was a way of stopping a teacher doing those things *without* stopping them doing other things that might be beneficial, I'd support that. But the problem for me, is I'm not sure if that is possible. I do make a very real distinction between a nasty comment made in a classroom environment as a form of attempting to discipline a student for a real fault, and a nasty comment made for no good reason. I think the former can be appropriate in some cases. I think the latter is inappropriate. The problem I have is that the Snape like teachers I had - how would we have eliminated the risk of the latter, without also eliminating the former? That's what gives me pause. And when you are judging a teacher as a teacher, you need to look at the whole picture - not single incidents (yes, there can be single incidents that invalidate everything else - child molestation, for example - but generally speaking things aren't at that level.) > Shaun: > > > I can't demonstrate this statistically but I do have the > > > impression that most of those who express a dislike for Snape > > > *as a teacher* on this list are female, and most of those who > > > express support for his teaching style as valid are male. > > SSSusan: > A fascinating possibility, Shaun. Though... > SSSusan: > ... so it would be interesting to actually assess this somehow. Shaun: Depending on what thesis topic I wind up getting approval for, I might actually try and look at this. > SSSusan: > And I would add that one might also need to define "stress." What > FORM of stress improves learning? Shaun: A very good question. I actually intend to get copies of all the articles Sax cites and check out these details - his information comes from a very wide range of places and different types of studies. I'm actually going to a seminar he is running this evening - he's in Australia on a tour, having been brought out here by some single sex schools to promote the idea of single sex education. 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 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu May 18 06:45:54 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 06:45:54 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152416 SSSusan: > > Anybody else game? > zgirnius: Thank you, Susan, for that reminder of a great HBP moment. I too laughed out loud in that scene. Personally, I loved Lockhart. He was fantastic, from his golden locks down to his lavender-clad toes. Do I recall correctly that Molly was still using a book of his on household pests in OotP? His quizzes (at which Hermione excelled, hee hee) all about his favorite color, his life's ambition, and other important aspects of DADA made me laugh. As did the pixie scene. "Peskipiksi pesternomi!" slayed me. Still does, actually. I also loved Harry's detentions, helping to answer Gilderoy's fan mail. But the best scene with him for me was the duelling club scene. It is still one of my very favorite scenes. I loved the line about the students still having their Potions Master in the morning. It was great the first time around, because this was definitely not high on the list of Harry and Ron's worries (it was more likely to have been a fond hope that they would NOT). Now it is still funny because of how utterly ridiculous it is for Lockhart to say this, when we all know Snape could have 'sent him to the hospital wing in a matchbox' (to quote Snape). And, OK, it is the medium which must not be named, but we're having fun, right? Kenneth Branagh and Alan Rickman doing this scene...priceless. It's why I bought a copy of the movie. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Thu May 18 07:14:46 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 07:14:46 -0000 Subject: Ginny's Behavior/Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: <20060517213949.50755.qmail@web37215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152417 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, catherine higgins wrote: > The Weasley family, or at least some of them, don't like Fleur for a variety of reasons, well, actually only two: her looks and her attitude. I do consider them shallow for disliking her because she is beautiful, but they have other reason's as well. Being part Veela, Fleur must have come across this before, and maybe, just maybe instead of criticizing everything about her family-in-law's lifestyle, keep your mouth shut and be nice. Defending Fleur because of her left-handed compliment that Ginny would look nice in pale gold, doesn't get her off the hook for saying that she would "look 'orrible in pink". That's just not the right way to go about things, with anyone, let alone your mother-in-law's only daughter! What a wonderful post. Only one comment: I don't think they dislike her for her looks, but because she is so utterly and totally vain. Yes, she is beautiful, but she flaunts it, she is as obsessed with her looks as Lockheart. Now, if one of my kids would bring home somebody like that it would take me a long time to figure out there was something else there instead of only the outside, because that is all she shows. Top that with the way Fleur behaves and I can easily see why Molly is not happy and fears her son will make a marriage he will deeply regret when the attraction of beauty has worn off. Gerry From mudblood68 at yahoo.de Thu May 18 10:48:04 2006 From: mudblood68 at yahoo.de (Claudia) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 10:48:04 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152418 > SSSusan: So, especially since > Tom Sr. apparently had the financial means, I do think he should have > made sure the child didn't STARVE to death. > > Claudia: Setting aside the issue what his moral duties in this case are, I'm not at all sure HE had the financial means. Does it say anywhere he has his own money? Because if not, he would have to live on the allowances his parents gave him. I'm sure there would have been enough money as long as he behaved suitable in their eyes, but they would stop giving him money when he "ran away" with the wrong girl. And I don't think they would go back to giving him all the money he wanted (or got before) for fear he might do another crazy thing again. Claudia From hokukaua at aol.com Thu May 18 01:58:43 2006 From: hokukaua at aol.com (hokukaua at aol.com) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:58:43 EDT Subject: a new? topic Message-ID: <30c.50f35ec.319d2ed3@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152419 In a message dated 5/17/2006 9:15:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com writes: Okay, here goes. I haven't haven't had time to read everything written since HBP came out, so if this is not a new topic, I apologize. Does anybody else wonder when or how the Vanishing Cabinet broke? I find the fact that the two cabinets form a secret passage from B&B to Hogwarts highly interesting and perhaps significant. Lord V once worked at B&B, after all. Was the cabinet broken then? If not, might he have used it to sneak into Hogwarts? What, if any, connection might there be between his attempt to gain a teaching position at Hogwarts and the fact that at one time a passage, apparently unknown to Dumbledore, existed between the two cabinets? I also wonder why Voldemort had his Death Eaters positioned in Hogsmeade when he went to ask Dumbledore for the teaching job. I realize that I might seem to be bringing up more than one topic here, but I think they are all connected. I also suspect that the last horcrux is at Hogwarts and that the final confrontation will take place there. Harry will, therefore, have to return to school. Any thoughts? Ley here: Well, I believe that it was Peeves that broke the vanishing cabinet (sorry if I'm wrong, I'm just going off of memory after not reading the series for some time). I also think it would be a great idea to have the 'final confrontation' as you say @ Hogwarts. It would bring Harry back to the place that he decided to leave early from (which, btw, I was very upset to hear that Harry would not be continuing ANY of his magical education.). How is he going to learn any more spells and charms and jinxes and other things that could help him tremendously in his fight against LV and possibly his death eaters? I don't think that Ron or Hermione will be with Harry when he and LV do meet though, b/c they've never made it that far with him. i.e. SS- Ron leaves at the chess board, Hermione at the potion room while Harry goes on to meet Quirrel/ CoS- Hermione gets petrified, Ron is stuck at the other side of a rock pile while Harry goes off to battle the basilisk and save Ginny/ PoA- Ron is in the hospital wing with an injured leg and Hermione... just sort of stands there while Harry conjures a partonus to save himself and Sirius/ GoF- obviously neither of them even get into the maze, let alone the graveyard/ OotP- Hermione got knocked out cold by a death eater, Ron was being attacked by a brain while Harry went to the Atrium (w/ Dumbledore)/ and finally HBP- Hermione and Ron were in the castle holding back death eaters as best they can while Harry obtained a 'horcrux' with Dumbledore and chased Malfoy and Snape to the gates. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 18 12:48:43 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 08:48:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny's Behavior/Ginny Haters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518124843.5114.qmail@web37204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152420 festuco wrote: Catherine wrote: > The Weasley family, or at least some of them, don't like Fleur for >a variety of reasons, well, actually only two: her looks and her >attitude. Festuco: I don't think they dislike her for her looks, but because she is so utterly and totally vain. Catherine again: Well, that's what I meant by her attitude ;-) But to expand a bit. I think being so beautiful can be very off-putting to a lot of women (myself included, although I'm working on that!) I think right away, before she opens her mouth, we expect a beautiful woman to be vain, egotistical and dumb. It's a steroetype. Unfortunately, Fleur has an excess of vanity and egocentrism, so to a certain extent, she reinforces the sterotype. Had she been *really* nice and made an effort to appear to enjoy herself, and keep her left-handed compliments to herself, she would have overcome the type-casting and would have been more welcome in the house. Fleur is probably sick to death of people treating her as nothing more than a "part-Veela". I would need canon, but it seems Fleur is a whole lot nicer to poeple who *aren't* taken in by her Veela charms. Bill seems to act pretty normal around her, as does Harry. It's probably a relief to her that not every guy around her behaves like a total idiot when she's around. She *is* smart, not just beautiful, she just needs to work on her social skills, even more than her "eenglish" Catherine __________________________________________________ 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 foxmoth at qnet.com Thu May 18 12:57:10 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:57:10 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152421 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Magpie: > > > If Tom did realize that this wasn't love he was feeling, because it didn't feel good, if he's suffering anything like obsession a cold shower is useless. The only way he can stop suffering is to be with Merope. It could feel very much like being enslaved. > > Alla: > > Well, yes, I agree, BUT I am having even bigger problem on > Tom "should have been able to not act on his obsession" argument. > Yes, Love potion produces obsession, but um, how do we know that the > person who drank Love potion is able to distingush between the two. > I mean, yes, the outside observer ( whoever that was initially who > created the Love potions, or somebody who tested them, etc) made > that conclusion, but for all we know person under the influence of > Love potion indeed thinks that he IS in love. > > And we HEARD from Ron that he thinks that he is in love with Romilda > as Pippin pointed out earlier. Pippin also argued that Ron was not > sure, but I saw no evidence that Ron was thinking that he feels > something else, not love. Pippin: Could Ron tell that he was over-excited and might act foolishly? There is canon for that. When Ron gets to Slughorn's office, he trips over something and worries that Romilda might see it, and when Sluggie suggests that he take something to calm himself down, Ron eagerly says, "Brilliant." I'm no expert, but I don't think excitement makes a person legally incompetent to marry-- and while the love potion has made Ron eager to share his feelings, he's still concerned about looking like a prat. Ron had been tricked into thinking that Romilda attracted him "Have you seen her hair, it's all black and shiny and silky...and her eyes? Her big dark eyes? And her--" and that this attraction was love. Whatever tradition may say, Rowling's love potions do work by making the intended seem attractive. But that could happen by Muggle means, all legal, all deceptive but allowable under the "all's fair in love and war" maxim. Being deceived about your partner's attractiveness or the depth of your feelings is not "substantial deception." Adults (and Ron has just reached adulthood) are supposed to know that their hearts and their eyes could be wrong about things like that. There is no canon that love potions make one forget that, any more than such Muggle charms as smooth manners and high status, or chocolates, liquor and perfume, all of which work on the brain. Tom Jr needed no more than the first two to "hoodwink" Ginny into pouring out her soul. Slughorn uses 'obsession' as a synonym for infatuation, not a clinical disorder. He says that this is not real love, which again distinguishes Rowling's potions from their other literary counterparts. Tristan and Isolde's feelings are very real, and even the Midsummer Night's Dream lovers are in love for as long as the enchantment lies on them. This is different. Slughorn never tells us what damage he's seen, but canon offers three tales: the tragedy of Tom and Merope, the comedy of Romilda and Ron, and the romance between Bill and Fleur. Taken out of context, the story of Tom and Merope could be about date rape, but Dumbledore keeps the story of Tom and Merope in the context of obsessive love by imagining that a potion has been used, telling Harry how Merope could have given it to Tom in a cup of water, and saying how she must have decided to stop using it. Can lovers in the Potterverse tell when their feelings are real? We are introduced, through Molly's comments, to the idea that Bill and Fleur are being too hasty, that the pressures of war might be intensifying what they feel for one another. She wants them to take some time. And they do. They have a good old-fashioned year- long engagement. That, IMO, is JKR's recipe for distinguishing between love and infatuation. If Tom had been the sort of person, like Ron, who was willing to wait to be sure he wasn't making a fool of himself, would he have run off with Merope immediately? I think not. But he was in a hurry to satisfy himself -- and too arrogant to think his feelings might deceive him. And then, being in a hurry to escape from his situation, he deserted her, her unborn child, and the legal obligation he had taken on in his haste to satisfy himself. I don't blame him for being horrified and repulsed --but those things do not release him from the duties he freely, if mistakenly, hastily and unwisely, undertook. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu May 18 13:07:53 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:07:53 -0000 Subject: Book Seven plot Re: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152422 As I've posted on another list, one way to handle all the plotlines in Book Seven would be to have all the action take place in the summer. Suppose Voldemort meets his end on October 31? Then Hogwarts can re-open, Harry can enjoy his seventh year in peace, everyone gets a chance to sit their NEWTS, and JKR won't have to try and convince us that we should care how the characters are going to do in their exams when the future of the whole WW is at stake. Pippin From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 18 13:11:34 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:11:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518131134.2891.qmail@web37207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152423 I think my all-time favorite moment in the series so far has to be the Twins swamp and departure from Hogwarts! I loved that scene! And then with Peeves following behind Umbrage blowing raspberries every time she opened her mouth! That was sooooo good! Another was the scene with DD at the Dursley's with the glasses of mead, that killed me too. And I think my most laugh-out-loud-and-embarrass-myself-on-the-bus part was in HBP when they were in Charms and Seamus wasn't paying attention... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HBP Chapter 17 Lost in visions of this happy prospect, he flicked his wand a little too enthusiastically, so that instead of producing the fountain of pure water that was the object of that day's Charms lesson, he let out a hoselike jet that ricocheted off the ceiling and knocking Professor Flitwick flat on his face. "Harry's already apparated," Ron told a slightly abashed Seamus, after Professor Flitwick had dried himself off with a wave of his wand and set Seamus lines ("I am a wizard, not a baboon brandishing a stick").... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think I giggled for weeks after that whenever I thought about it! That's the best line in the series. (IMO of course....at least for the funny stuff, I have other touching favorite moments too...) Catherine __________________________________________________ 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 gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu May 18 13:13:16 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:13:16 -0000 Subject: a new? topic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152424 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa Croke" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cleverestwitchofherage" > wrote: > > > Does anybody else wonder when or how the Vanishing Cabinet broke? > I > > find the fact that the two cabinets form a secret passage from B&B > > to Hogwarts highly interesting and perhaps significant. Lord V > once > > worked at B&B, after all. Was the cabinet broken then? If not, > might > > he have used it to sneak into Hogwarts? What, if any, connection > > might there be between his attempt to gain a teaching position at > > Hogwarts and the fact that at one time a passage, apparently > unknown > > to Dumbledore, existed between the two cabinets? > aussiehpnut: > I'm not absolutely positive about this, but I THINK that Nearly > Headless Nick persuaded Peeves to smash the Vanishing Cabinet over > Filch's office to distract him, so that Harry wouldn't get into > trouble. I can't remember which book it was in, but Harry had just > come in dripping mud after a Quidditch practice. I can't remember > any more than that. Geoff: The relevant canon is: '"It was only a bit of mud!" said Harry. "It's only a bit of mud to you, boy, but to me it's an extra hour scrubbing!" shouted Filch, a drip shivering unpleasantly at the end of his bulbous nose. "Crime... befouling the castle... suggested sentence..." Dabbing at his streaming nose, Filch squinted unpleasantly at Harry, who waited with bated breath for his sentence to fall. But as Filch lowered his quill, there was a great BANG! on the ceiling of the office, which made the oil lamp rattle. "PEEVES!" Filch roared, flinging down his quill in a transport of rage. "I'll have you this time, I'll have you!"' (COS "The Deathday Party" p.97 UK edition) 'Filch was looking triumphant. "That vanishing cabinet was extremely valuable!" he was saying gleefully to Mrs.Norris. "We'll have Peeves out this time, my sweet." (ibid. p.98) '"Harry! Harry! Did it work?" Nearly Headless Nick came gliding out of a classroom. Behind him, Harry could see the wreckage of a large black and gold cabinet which appeared to have been dropped from a great height. "I persuaded Peeves to crash it right over Filch's office," said Nick eagerly. "Thought it might distract him -" "Was that you?" said Harry gratefully. "Yeah, it worked. I didn't even get detention. Thanks Nick!"' (ibid. p.99) The interesting thing is that, although the cabinet is described as being wrecked, it still had some capability if you look at the remaining references made to it: 'Then, as though he (Draco) could not help himself, he said, "I had to mend that broken Vanishing Cabinet that no one's used for years. The one Montague got lost in last year." "Aaaah." Dumbledore's sigh was half a groan He closed his eyes for a moment. "That was clever... there is a pair, I take i?" "The other's in Bprgin and Burkes," said Malfoy, "and they made a kind of passage between them." (HBP "The LIghtning-Struck Tower" p.548 UK edition) '"Malfoy just docked us all about fifty points," said Harry furiously as they watched several more stones fly upwards from the Gryffindor hour-glass. "Yeah, Montague tried to do us during break," said George. "What do you mean, 'tried'?" said Ron quickly. "He never managed to get all the words out," said Fred, "due to the fact that we forced him head-first into that Vanishing Cabinet on the first floor." Hermione looked very shocked. "But you'll get into terrible trouble!" "Not until Montague reappears and that could take weeks, I dunno where we sent him," said Fred coolly.' (OOTP "Snape's worst memory" p.552 UK edition) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 13:55:31 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:55:31 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152425 > Pippin: > > Could Ron tell that he was over-excited and might act foolishly? > There is canon for that. When Ron gets to Slughorn's office, he trips > over something and worries that Romilda might see it, and when Sluggie > suggests that he take something to calm himself down, Ron eagerly says, > "Brilliant." I'm no expert, but I don't think excitement makes a person legally > incompetent to marry-- and while the love potion has made Ron eager > to share his feelings, he's still concerned about looking like a prat. > Alla: I will try again. Under the influence of the Love potion Ron thinks that he is in love with Romilda. I don't see anywhere in canon that Ron knows that he is NOT in love. He does not remember that he wants nothing to do with Romilda without potion and him concerning about looking like a prat as nothing to do with the fact that he had been made to FEEL something he really does not. For some reason you think that Ron is able to resist those feelings, to figure out that they are not real, is that correct? Where do you see it in canon? Same with Tom Sr. Putting aside the fact that I cannot grasp how drugged person should be able to make the rational decision, where do you see the indication that Tom KNEW or at least SHOULD have been able to know that his feelings for Merope are not real. I think you are stretching the point a lot, personally. Pippin: > Ron had been tricked into thinking that Romilda attracted > him "Have you seen her hair, it's all black and shiny and silky...and her > eyes? Her big dark eyes? And her--" and that this attraction was love. > Whatever tradition may say, Rowling's love potions do work by > making the intended seem attractive. > > But that could happen by Muggle means, all legal, all deceptive but > allowable under the "all's fair in love and war" maxim. Being deceived > about your partner's attractiveness or the depth of your feelings is > not "substantial deception." Alla: Um, Ron had been made to FEEL what he does not really feel. I am really not sure how this is fair in any way, shape or form, but to each their own of course. Pippin: > Adults (and Ron has just reached adulthood) are supposed to know > that their hearts and their eyes could be wrong about things like that. Alla: Sure, when they are not drugged , they are supposed to know. I don't see anywhere in the books that love potion let you make that kind of the determination. Pippin: > There is no canon that love potions make one forget that, any more > than such Muggle charms as smooth manners and high status, or > chocolates, liquor and perfume, all of which work on the brain. > Tom Jr needed no more than the first two to "hoodwink" Ginny into > pouring out her soul. Alla: YES, there is canon. Tom forgot the woman he loved under the influence of the potion. You add additional step to the chain of events. Tom was drugged , that is why he forgot. For some reason you argue if I understand you correctly that Tom was vain and arrogant, that is why he forgot. I find no support for this additional step in canon. To me it is very simple ? he was given a drug, which made him forget, after the influence of the drug ended, he remembered. Pippin: > That, IMO, is JKR's recipe for distinguishing between love > and infatuation. If Tom had been the sort of person, like Ron, > who was willing to wait to be sure he wasn't making a fool > of himself, would he have run off with Merope immediately? > I think not. But he was in a hurry to satisfy himself -- and too > arrogant to think his feelings might deceive him. And then, > being in a hurry to escape from his situation, he deserted her, > her unborn child, and the legal obligation he had taken on in his > haste to satisfy himself. Alla: Willing to wait? But where is the proof that the potion was letting him wait? The dose could have been so strong that he was forced to run with Merope and marry her that very moment. Pippin: > I don't blame him for being horrified and repulsed --but those > things do not release him from the duties he freely, if mistakenly, > hastily and unwisely, undertook. Alla: Without Merope giving him potion the thought of taking those duties on in the first place would have never entered his mind. JMO, Alla From phil at pcsgames.net Thu May 18 13:59:17 2006 From: phil at pcsgames.net (Phil Vlasak) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:59:17 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Book Seven plot Re: Request for new topics References: Message-ID: <00f901c67a83$4520a6b0$6600a8c0@phil> No: HPFGUIDX 152426 pippin_999 said, > As I've posted on another list, one way to handle all the plotlines in > Book Seven would be to have all the action take place in the summer. > > Suppose Voldemort meets his end on October 31? > > Then Hogwarts can re-open, Harry can enjoy his seventh year in peace, > everyone gets a chance to sit their NEWTS, and JKR won't have to try > and convince us that we should care how the characters are going to > do in their exams when the future of the whole WW is at stake. > > Pippin Now Phil with a way to quickly dispose of the horcrux hunt: Voldemort mentally ticks off his six horcruxes: 1. My Diary, Drat Harry destroyed it! 2. Slytherin's Basilisk, Double Drat, that one's gone too! Who would have guessed someone could get into the chamber? 3. Slytherin's Locket, well that one is safe in the cave. 4. Slytherin's Ring, Damn that old Dumbledore must have found it! 5. Gryffindor's two-way mirror, Yes I am sure it still is in the wreckage of the potter's home. 6. Hufflepuff's cup Now that one will be safe where I left it, with all the other cups in the Hogwarts' kitchen. 7. Ravenclaw's Vanishing Cabinet, Now that is the one I left in plane sight on the first floor of Hogwarts, and it sure made it easy to sneak into the castle! Oh, no! I made seven horcruxes not six! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 14:17:18 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:17:18 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152427 Carol wrote: > Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and > immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own > lives and social views? SSSusan: You know, I've recently been bemoaning the fact, offlist to a couple of folks, that there seems to be a tendency to focus a LOT on real life morality when we discuss the Potterverse these days. That's not always a bad thing... it's certainly natural to draw parallels to the life we lead... but sometimes it almost seems like we just can't have FUN with the books and characters, can't JOSH about things, without a RL "standard" or "judgment" being handed down. Alla: Hehehe. I love your posts and even though I can probably put my name under every word of what Lupinlore said about discussing the books in connection with RL, I certainly know that this is my favorite way of discussing the books, but not the only one possible. Besides, fun can be there even if we are bringing RL examples, no? SSSusan: ('Course, I tossed my two knuts into the Tom/Merope/Love Potion thread today by talking about grounds for Catholic annulment, so take my whining with a grain of salt. ;-)) Alla: Me thinks everybody in that thread stayed quite nicely in canon land while bringing in canon examples, but of course I am actively participating in that thread, so take my whinings with the grain of salt too as biased party. :) SSSusan: I mean, would anyone dare suggest Snape is sexy here? Come on, tell the truth! Would anyone?? And I don't mean Rickman!Snape either. It *has* been done here before, you know, people talking about Snape being sexy and why.... Alla: I really don't see why not suggest that Snape is sexy, if that is your thing, than that's your thing. But funnily enough I was talking to somebody off list about sexiness of the characters and I probably mentioned it on list in the past, but I really do NOT find any of the adult characters sexy. Honestly, I don't. And I am not just talking about Snape, I am also talking about Sirius, who I love dearly as a character, and whom I think would have been a loyal friend after a lot of therapy sessions :) I don't know why. I mean, Sirius IS describes as physically attractive, but I guess not my type. If I were to ream about Potterverse guys, I would go for Harry or Ron, when they will be in their early thirties. :) SSSusan: Am I truly in a small minority of people who still really LIKES the Potterverse? still guffaws at some of JKR's clever turns of phrase? still marvels at her creativity? still shakes her head that this writer can have us arguing after SIX books about whether a character is evil, good, neither or both? Alla: Let me put it this way, I certainly like the Potterverse as the world JKR created, but I like it the way I like our world with all its problems, not as the world I would close my eyes and wanted to escape to for a few minutes. Probably because I choose to look at Potterverse with Harry??s eyes, that way I get the most enjoyment out of the books, I discover pains and problems of that world the way he discovers it and to tell you the truth, I really don't find it to be pretty. Would I want to stop by in that world? Sure, to meet the "people" who live there and whom I like very much. Would I want to live there? I am changing my answer depending on my mood, but the answer is probably not. SSSusan: Am I in a small minority of people who still actually LIKES Harry himself? ::huffs on D'oH shield and glances at it sentimentally:: How 'bout we -- without succumbing to a series of just one-liners -- talk about what we LOVE about the books? what we find FUN about them, even after all this time? Alla: Love Harry, don't have books with me right now, but I am getting a lot of fun out of twins' moments. Will bring quotes later on. "Seriously evil wizard coming through" is one of my favorite lines of all time. Thanks Susan. :) From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Thu May 18 15:00:50 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:00:50 -0000 Subject: a new? topic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152428 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > The relevant canon is: > Steven1965aaa: Great detective work. When I went back after reading HBP and re-read COS, I was bowled over by the set ups and how she must have had it all planned out back then. From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu May 18 15:08:36 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:08:36 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152429 > Alla: > > > Same with Tom Sr. Putting aside the fact that I cannot grasp how > drugged person should be able to make the rational decision, where do > you see the indication that Tom KNEW or at least SHOULD have been > able to know that his feelings for Merope are not real. Pippin: Because, drugs or no drugs, everybody who knows anything about love knows that their feelings might not be real. Merope might be ignorant enough not to know that it's important to distinguish between love and infatuation even though they can feel the same -- *she* might think she really loves Tom. But *he* should know, being an educated and sophisticated young person, that, as Dumbledore told Harry some time ago, the very things we want most are often the worst for us. Now maybe the potion could have been so strong that it would force him to forget that. But that is speculation. When Dumbledore told Harry not to look for the Mirror of Erised again, Harry was able to take the advice, even though he was enchanted. I can see where a more arrogant person, say Malfoy, would have disregarded Dumbledore, can you? > > Alla: > > Without Merope giving him potion the thought of taking those duties > on in the first place would have never entered his mind. Pippin: For me, the question is not how those thoughts entered his mind -- thoughts get into people's head in all sorts of ways. If he'd seen a naughty postcard, perhaps he wouldn't be able to avoid being aroused and thinking he'd fallen in love with the model, but would he be forced to marry her if she asked him to, even if he thought his love was real? He could be drugged into it, but we just don't know that the love potion has that effect. We know the potion would make him think he was in love and that Merope was an attractive woman. We don't know that it made him act on those feelings in whatever way Merope wished, which would be an effect like the Imperius curse. If it did have that effect I'd expect Voldemort to use it -- just put love potion in the water and everyone would have to obey him. :) Pippin From lunalovegood at shaw.ca Thu May 18 15:10:32 2006 From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (tbernhard2000) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:10:32 -0000 Subject: New Topics!!! (was Re: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152430 justcarol67 wrote: > Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own lives and social views? Carol, you ask if we can look at the books themselves. I challenge you to tell us what the books themselves are then!!! Or, if you choose another way, you could demonstrate that what YOU say about the books is really about yourself! Anyone can do this, actually. I've done it below, in fact, with my topics. So, I often think of new topics - the problem is, they are unsettling, challenging, complex or what have you - they need some TBAY and TBAY is a ghost town (which was inevitable - any place where things sink so quickly isn't going to be prime real estate after a while). Nevertheless: We could discuss the anarchist politic behind the narrative! We could notate and discuss instances where Rowling seems to be saying morality is crap, but situationist type ethical acts are essential! Is Rowling an existentialist? More like Camus or Sarte? Is she a socialist? A liberal? We could look for the effects in the narrative of an author (woman) in poverty becoming super rich! (And if we can't identify these effects, why not? Are we missing something, or is the narrative truly aside from Rowling the millionaire?) We could generalize about how a book so clearly about class is analyzed without reference to class - or, if it is analyzed with reference to class, in such a way that completely negates what Rowling says about class! We could promise never to write a single post to HPforGrownups that didn't acknowledge that, on some level or another, anything we say about the books can be described as "meta". We could identify parts of the narrative that encourage intentional misreading - I hold, for example, that Arthur's fascination with muggle stuff is entirely for fun, and nothing else - it's like people we know who collect weird and boring stuff. But does it count as an inverse reflection of those fascinated (in the Real World) with magic and so forth? You bet!!!! And THAT is damn fun! We could talk about how Harry is an ass when he says he doesn't care if all the centaurs get trampled. We could decide if he means what he says or not - was it said in a moment of anger but isn't sincere? Well, of course. But it, I submit, is a VERY serious topic - I think, in the RW, there are lots of people who say such things to themselves but would never really want it to happen. If anyone reading this wants to deny this, feel free - but I doubt it would be believed.... And so on... dan From triinum at yahoo.com Thu May 18 15:37:34 2006 From: triinum at yahoo.com (triinum) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:37:34 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152431 > houyhnhnm: > ********************* > "Sectum--!" > Snape flicked his wand and the curse was repelled yet again; but > Harry was mere feet away now and he could see Snape's face clearly at > last: He was no longer sneering or jeering; the blazing flames showed > a face full of rage. Mustering all his powers of concentration, Harry > thought, Levi-- > "No, Potter!: screamed Snape. There was a loud BANG and Harry > was soaring backward.... > ********************* > > After hearing Harry attempt to use Sectumsempra, Snape was no longer > sneering or jeering, but he was still flicking. It seems it *was* the > attempted use of Levicorpus, that put Snape over the top. Strange how Snape recognized and shielded the Levicorpus before it hit him (for he wasn't levitated, not even for a moment). He didn't hear it, and he *said* in his class that non-verbal spells take the opponent by surprise. We have of course seen that spells (nvbl or other) can be felt when they pass close by (like the one Kingsley cast on Millicent, past Harry). But at least Harry can't recognize specific spells passing or approaching him by the breath of air they carry, or whatever else they may feel like (perhaps heat, pressure, tickling?). He only recognizes them by the sound and light effects (which Levicorpus is lacking). So, all I can make of this is that Snape is a really kick-ass wizard who's not taken by surprise with even non-verbal spells :-) Or what? Trin From kernsac at earthlink.net Thu May 18 15:28:01 2006 From: kernsac at earthlink.net (Peggy Kern) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 08:28:01 -0700 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) References: Message-ID: <016601c67a8f$a7101980$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> No: HPFGUIDX 152432 > SSSusan: >> >> Anybody else game? Peggy now: The thing I always get a chuckle at is the way the mandrakes' growth is described. At one point they're becoming moody, which indicates they're leaving childhood; then they talk about when their acne clears up; then they have a wild party in the greenhouse; and when they start to try to move into each other's pots, they'll be ready. As a parent who has seen her daughter go through all these stages, I love it! Peggy From kernsac at earthlink.net Thu May 18 15:20:09 2006 From: kernsac at earthlink.net (Peggy Kern) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 08:20:09 -0700 Subject: Horcrux hunting References: Message-ID: <015e01c67a8e$8de0c320$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> No: HPFGUIDX 152433 Tonks_op: Just trying to figure out why DD would take Harry to such a dangerous place... Peggy now: Maybe Dumbledore has finally accepted the fact that Harry can't be sheltered and protected from danger, and that because he intends to get rid of Voldemort, he will inevitably be in dangerous situations. Better to have a taste of one with Dumbledore to see what's in store and how to handle it, than to experience this type of thing for the first time all alone. IMHO, Dumbledore should have started Harry along this road as soon as Harry was old enough to ask questions about why Voldemort wanted to kill him, etc. I wonder how much more prepared Harry would have been for the task ahead of him. Peggy From belviso at attglobal.net Thu May 18 16:02:24 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:02:24 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152434 > Pippin: > Because, drugs or no drugs, everybody who knows anything about love > knows that their feelings might not be real. Magpie: I don't think anyone goes through life thinking they're feelings might not be real. What you mean is that they don't know whether the real feelings they have should be called "love" or not, but that's because "love" is a vague and unspecific word, not because your feelings aren't. Tom's feelings are real, they are the effects of a Potion he's been given. Tom is feeling the symptoms of love. Pippin: Merope might be ignorant > enough not to know that it's important to distinguish between love and > infatuation even though they can feel the same -- *she* might > think she really loves Tom. But *he* should know, being an educated > and sophisticated young person, that, as Dumbledore told Harry > some time ago, the very things we want most are often the worst > for us. Magpie: So let me get this straight. Knowing the difference between love and infatuation and obsession (or the effects of a Love Potion you don't know exists) is such a character-tainting thing not to know that Tom's not knowing the difference makes him at fault for his own exploitation by another person (an exploitation he is completely unaware of). However Merope, because she's "ignorant" gets a total pass on thinking she's in love with Tom, and also a pass on thinking that drugging a person and enslaving him is okay if you love them. This is because Tom is "sophsticated and educated" and Merope isn't. But being sophisticated and educated does not historically mean you are any wiser or dumber in matters of love than an illiterate person. In fact, this story plays on the opposite suggestion. The "ignorant and unsophisticated person" has literally brewed the symptoms of love in a bottle. That's the thing about Merope. How can I support her as she uses her "power" as a woman, when as soon as the time comes to take responsibity for that power she's a helpless female again being mistreated by the sophistiated nasty man? It's Tom that's uneducated and unsophisticated in this situation. He doesn't even know love potions exist much less how to make one or how to recognize the effects of one. Pippin: > When Dumbledore told Harry not to look for the Mirror of Erised > again, Harry was able to take the advice, even though he was enchanted. Magpie: Well, first Dumbledore did not think to give Tom Riddle advice on how to handle a love potion or how to recognize a love potion's effects the way that he tells Harry exactly what the Mirror of Erised does and what it is. If some Muggle had given Tom Riddle advice on being careful to not mistake infatuation or obsession for love, and he applied that to the Merope situation by examining his feelings he'd probably come to the conclusion that yes, this is love, thanks to the continuous doses of love potion. Pippin: > I can see where a more arrogant person, say Malfoy, would have disregarded > Dumbledore, can you? Magpie: The question is...what is the implication of that? Why does Tom Riddle keep getting compared to the Malfoys? And here he's being compared in a situation that never happened, one where Malfoy is warned against not looking in the Mirror of Erised and due to his bad character/arrogance rejects Dumbledore's advice. So apparently we're again supposed to imagine a Tom Riddle complicit in his own entrapment and probably deserving of it. But the fact remains that whether or not Tom Riddle is arrogant, his arrogance is irrelevent to what happened to him. > Pippin: > > For me, the question is not how those thoughts entered his mind -- > thoughts get into people's head in all sorts of ways. If he'd seen > a naughty postcard, perhaps he wouldn't be able to avoid being > aroused and thinking he'd fallen in love with the model, > but would he be forced to marry her if she asked him to, even if he > thought his love was real? He could be drugged into it, but we just > don't know that the love potion has that effect. Magpie: Merope is the agent of action in this scenario. We can't just not question how those thoughts entered tom's head when the crime in question is intentionally infecting someone with a compulsive, unwanted feeling or emotion. Tom didn't see a naughty postcard, and whether or not he would have fallen in love with the model on one has no bearing on this situation whatsoever (though I see no reason to assume he would, since he doesn't seem to suffer from that kind of mental disorder naturally). Pippin:> > We know the potion would make him think he was in love and that > Merope was an attractive woman. We don't know that it made him > act on those feelings in whatever way Merope wished, which would > be an effect like the Imperius curse. If it did have that effect > I'd expect Voldemort to use it -- just put love potion in the water > and everyone would have to obey him. :) Magpie: Actually, we know that love itself makes one find another person attractive, and since this potion is a "love potion" and not a "find me attractive" potion I'd say it's more likely that that's what it produces. Tom then acted on those feelings of love the way that he, Tom, would normally act on feelings of love--he asked the girl in question to marry him rather than any other number of things he could have done. Merope is responsible for actions that he took in good faith due to the artificial situation she created. Just as, if she had given Tom a Potion to make him think the house was on fire and he jumped out the window to escape the flames, she would be responsible for his death by falling despite the fact that she didn't physically force him to jump out the window. -m From belviso at attglobal.net Thu May 18 16:10:07 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:10:07 -0000 Subject: (nvbl)/What's fun about the HPs?/Amortentia and re The morality of love poti In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152435 doddiemouse: > This would fit into the parallels between Harry and Snape....Can you > imagine how angry Snape would be that Harry's DA group was more > successful than his because he(Harry) put no limitations on who could > join...(if Snape could create one....then being a member of slytherin > he could/would only teach pure bloods.....) Magpie: Err...Harry put plenty of limitations on who could join. The DA was a highly confidential group (with secret code coins to boot) made up of a small group of students who were either approached because they seemed like good candidates or who happened to hear and wouldn't take no for an answer (Zach). A lot of it depended on who you happened to know--obviously there were no Slytherins in it, which is significant because the hat had just sung about how all the houses were supposed to unite and the DA was partially Hermione's response to that. Only it wound up reflecting the schism instead of changing it. This isn't meant as a scolding of the DA or anything, but it wasn't an open club everyone could join. Alla: Me thinks everybody in that thread stayed quite nicely in canon land while bringing in canon examples, but of course I am actively participating in that thread, so take my whinings with the grain of salt too as biased party. :) Magpie: Heh--me too. Because I think the reason people are drawn to talk about the books is because nobody can agree on what actually happened in any particular scene. The books are practically designed that way, so people are always describing scenes differently than the way they actually happened, or basically they're just unable to describe the scene without getting biased and slanting events towards one character or another. That, of course, is a big concern in the books as well, so it's probably not surprising. The Tom/Merope thread, for instance, has got its facts in terms of what the characters do, and then lots of persuasive writing where one character is presented sympathetically and another is presented in a bad light. For instance, Tom (and Cecelia) are rich and snobbish, Tom is used to getting what he wants, Tom is upset that he finds himself married to an unsuitable bride (feel free to compare him to the genocidal murderer character being disgusted at the idea of marrying a Muggle just because she's a Muggle), Merope is a poor, gentle soul who has been abused and just wants love (you wouldn't deny her love, would you?), she's penniless, she lives in the 1930s, she made a mistake... The events are re-written to turn the Love Potion into a beauty treatment to make it into an easier, more familiar story where the moral is that Tom Riddle was shallow and Merope was wronged. The way the book is written easily allows for that kind of thing-it even encourages it, though I think it's a trap (at least I hope it is, otherwise the books support a justice system based on the most superficial, cynical and deceitful impulses). When you take a character who reads negatively (by making him rich and maybe suggesting he's a snob) and then a character who reads positively (abused by bullies) and then put them in a situation where the second character abuses the first, you're totally playing into peoples' natural desire that the two things be reconciled. We'd rather the victim be the person we most identify or sympathize with. Only in this case that's not what happened. I think that's why I and perhaps others feel compelled to keep replying in the thread, not because we want Merope reviled--I can honestly say I do feel sympathy for her--but because for some reason I can't stand to see the facts distorted. The Fleur situation is also written this way, imo. I agree that it's basically a comic subplot not to be given as much weight as the analysis suggests it has, but the fact remains that the joke turns on a reversal: we spend the whole book hearing Fleur talked about as an awful person, we're encouraged to laugh as the good characters find her insufferable, the narrator subtly laces all her moments with hints that she thinks she's all that, though our pov character himself is always a bit bemused by the fuss over her. But the final scene does not turn on people finally blowing up at Fleur. Instead it turns around and burns them, revealing that all along she's the one who's been treated more unfairly and we, as the reader, were somewhat complicit in it if we never saw it. The issue isn't resolved with Fleur agreeing to work on her oh-so-horrible personality, it's resolved by her showing what's really important to her and proving herself a force to be reckoned with in the family. This will probably lead to better behavior on all sides, that's the main issue. Obviously Snape in PS/SS was a big example of this-- Harry was perfectly right about his reaction to Snape personally, but was wrong to try to force that into Snape being the villain because of it. Personally, I've never much longed to spend time in the WW either. The books never captured my imagination in terms of my just loving them and wanting to read them over and over etc. I was just drawn to the fandom because I felt compelled to talk about them. I think Elkins has put this better, but basically it's the conflict I constantly feel about the books that makes me need to talk about them and work them out. I like doing that. -m From zgirnius at yahoo.com Thu May 18 16:15:34 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:15:34 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152436 Trin: > Strange how Snape recognized and shielded the Levicorpus before it hit > him (for he wasn't levitated, not even for a moment). He didn't hear > it, and he *said* in his class that non-verbal spells take the > opponent by surprise. > So, all I can make of this is that Snape is a really kick-ass wizard > who's not taken by surprise with even non-verbal spells :-) > Or what? zgirnius: My interpretation of this scene-Legilimency. Snape is able to identify and stop a nonverbal spell once he is face to face with Harry, because he is then able to use Legilimency to sense what spell Harry is thinking to himself. From lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk Wed May 17 20:56:59 2006 From: lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk (lunasaproject) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 20:56:59 -0000 Subject: Snape the teacher In-Reply-To: <20060517030538.M35428@alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152437 Shaun Hately: > The thing is - as I have said previously, I *benefited* greatly > from some Snape-like teachers I had as a child. They were among > the teachers who taught me best when so many of my other teachers > utterly failed to give me what I needed educationally. Lunasa: The same's true with me. In fact, I may hate more than one of my Snape-ish teachers at the moment, I know that they've done me good. In fact, people telling me I'm useless and that I'm going to fail always makes me want to prove them wrong. That's true with quite a lot of people in my year, actually. We may hate our English teacher, but we're not going to let him be right, are we?! It also takes a very specific type of person to be the nice, cool or friendly teacher. From an all girls catholic school perspective it takes a reasonably good looking (or weird looking, as the case may be) and fairly young teacher to pull that off. And they had better be a good teacher as well, becasue if they start wasting time just being nice and cool and good looking (Or weird looking. It works for my Physics teacher. He's class) and don't teach you anything, the students will throw a fit! But the Snape-like teachers, tend to pull it off. No one likes them but that doesn't matter. I know I'm gonna to pass my English exam at the end of month. And I hate my English teacher. And I've always felt Harry was a bit of gurner, anyway. lol From spirittalks at gmail.com Thu May 18 16:24:56 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:24:56 -0400 Subject: My favorite moments: References: Message-ID: <00fd01c67a97$9ac4d8c0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 152438 I like this thread! My favorite moments invariably include Fred and George. My most favorite is when Molly is shown Ron's letter saying he's been made a prefect. When the twins learn of the disgace we hear: "Oh, Mum's going to be revolting," groaned George. And so Mum does get revolting: "Mrs. Weasley let out a shriek just like Hermione's. "'I don't believe it! I don't believe it! Oh Ron how wonderful! A prefect! That's everyone in the family!'." "'What are Fred and I, next-door neighbors?" said George indicgantly, as his mother pushed him aside and flung her arms around her youngest son." It goes on and is one of the scenes I had the most fun with. Molly simply doesn't believe that fun and games and intelligence and success can go hand in hand. I wish that JKR had given Molly more air time covering the moment when she saw just how successful these two sons had become. She had to have noticed that their shop was the only one in sight that was successfully packed with shoppers in the otherwise depressing Diagon Alley, and had thoughts beyond fear at the sight of the poster in the window. I can't wait to see how Fred's and George's inventions make a difference in book 7. Another favorite time in the books was just after Fred and George made their big escape. When the usually stodgy Professor McGonnegal joined the other teachers in allowing chaos to reign even to the point where she was giving Peeves a tip on how to unscrew a chandelier. I can reread these books for the fifth time (and intend to) and can guarantee I'll be laughing out loud and getting funny looks from the people around me even then. Kim From wdcaroline at yahoo.ca Wed May 17 23:59:14 2006 From: wdcaroline at yahoo.ca (Wade Caroline) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 19:59:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Bold Prediction for Book 7 Message-ID: <20060517235914.2875.qmail@web61211.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152439 I have no idea who lives or dies, what the words before the last word, "scar" will be, nor who will have whose chidren, but from what I have gleaned in the month or so I have been reading posts in this group, Book 7 will 7,783 pages long! wade --------------------------------- The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new Yahoo! Mail. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From spirittalks at gmail.com Thu May 18 16:27:23 2006 From: spirittalks at gmail.com (Kim) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:27:23 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Horcrux hunting References: <015e01c67a8e$8de0c320$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> Message-ID: <010301c67a97$f25c1850$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 152440 >Tonks_op: Just trying to figure out why DD would take Harry to such a dangerous place... I think Dumbledore also believed that by now that Harry was powerful enough in his own right to take care of himself and even Dumbledore should the need arise. He did tell Harry that he wasn't worried because he was with Harry. I think JKR is trying to show us in that scene that we should start thinking of Harry as a powerful nearly adult wizard rather than a protected child. We're going to need to see him this way for book 7. Kim [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pegdigrazia at yahoo.com Thu May 18 16:55:03 2006 From: pegdigrazia at yahoo.com (Peg DiGrazia) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:55:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] My favorite moments: In-Reply-To: <00fd01c67a97$9ac4d8c0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: <20060518165503.58676.qmail@web42202.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152441 Kim: >I like this thread! Peg: Me too, and I like all of the moments that have been mentioned so far. But the two that always make me laugh out loud are: 1. U-NO-POO 2. I don't have the book in front of me so I can't provide the exact quote, but I believe it's during the first DA meeting when they're talking, and Ernie MacMillan says that he believes the DA will be the most important thing they do that year, even though it's their OWL year. He then looks around importantly, as if expecting the others to cry, "Surely not!" When they don't, he goes on to finish his sentence. Gets me every time. I love Ernie! --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2?/min or less. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu May 18 17:01:41 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:01:41 -0000 Subject: A Cauldron of Amortentia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152442 Potioncat: Who would have thought two little questions would start off such a discussion!! It's Carol's fault, you know, she asked if love potions are really dark. I think both sides of this issue have done an excellent job of stating their cases; a lot of valid points were made! I'm not sure how the WW sees love potions, but I'll bet family court is full of claims and counter-claims! In a world where something can magically binding, even if you never knew there were magical clauses, drinking love potions probably wouldn't excuse you from a relationship. Claimant: "Judge, My wife doesn't look so good since I found out she was slipping love potion into my tea and I starting coffee. What can I do?" Judge: "Drink the tea! Next case!" On the other hand, this may be the sort of situation that Phineas Black (the younger one) was thinking of when he pushed for Muggle rights. Back to another look at love potions. At the first potioncs class there is a cauldron of Amortentia at the Trio's desk. The fumes alone have an impact. Here's my summary from an earlier post: > Amortentia is the most powerful love potion in the world. Already made > and affecting the students as soon as they sit near it. Harry smells > a combination of scents, one at least is firmly connected to the > Burrow. He found it to be the most seductive scent ever, and even Ron > was grinning lazily. Then Ron seems to be competing with Harry for > Hermione's approval. Hermione starts to tell what it smell likes to > her, after announcing its aroma depends on "what attracts us", then > stops in mid-answer. Right after Potions they go to lunch, and Ginny > joins them. Harry notices she smells like the scent in the Amortentia. When I read it the first time, I thought the potion revealed your true love, but that isn't what canon says. Canon says it's the most powerful love potion and that it's smell depends on each person. So, how does it work? And did it show us who each of the trio really love? From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 10:51:45 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 03:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518105145.20938.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152443 SSSusan, who cannot BELIEVE she's entering into this thread, says: Setting aside the issue of who suffered more (I definitely believe each suffered, so I'm NOT arguing Merope didn't suffer a LOT), I just can't believe Tom's "marriage vows" enter into this at all. If he took his marriage "vows" under the influence of Merope's love potion, then why is he obligated to keep to those vows/that contract? And even if you're not arguing that he had a legal obligation to stand by her, I also don't think many people would feel he had any moral obligation either, regardless of how pathetic the situation was. *I'm* guessing he was horrified by what she had done and couldn't wait to get away. Am I alone in thinking that's how most of us would react if someone had tricked us into such a relationship and totally altered our life?? maria8162001: No, SSSusan, you're not alone in thinking that's how most of us are going to react if what happened to Tom Sr, will happen to any of us. We would all react the same. That is what I'm trying to point out in my post yesterday but I am not good at expressing my opinion, maybe because english is my second language. I have sympathy for Merope but the crime (if you could call it a crime) she did to Tom Sr, doesn't make it less and she should not get away with it just because we feel or should feel sorry for her, for the way she grew up. A crime is a crime no matter what your childhood is, IMO. From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:04:07 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:04:07 -0000 Subject: Book Seven plot Re: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152444 Pippin wrote: > As I've posted on another list, one way to handle all the plotlines in > Book Seven would be to have all the action take place in the summer. > > Suppose Voldemort meets his end on October 31? > > Then Hogwarts can re-open, Harry can enjoy his seventh year in peace, > everyone gets a chance to sit their NEWTS, and JKR won't have to try > and convince us that we should care how the characters are going to > do in their exams when the future of the whole WW is at stake. > Najwa now: That would be a long summer indeed. I suppose that could help, but I think that anyone who had a hand in assisting Harry should be exempt from exams because they just took down a big bad wizard to be quite honest. I mean doesn't that show for anything academically? Maybe when Harry finally defeats Voldemort that scar will go away as well because that scar has been such a pain for him. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:29:53 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:29:53 -0000 Subject: Horcurx making - when, who, what and where is it? ( was Re: a new? topic) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152445 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cleverestwitchofherage" > > wrote: > > > Does anybody else wonder when or how the Vanishing Cabinet broke? > > Geoff: > The relevant canon is: > (snip)> > But as Filch lowered his quill, there was a great BANG! on the ceiling of the office, which made the oil lamp rattle. > > "PEEVES!" Filch roared, flinging down his quill in a transport of rage. "I'll have you this time, I'll have you!"' > > (COS "The Deathday Party" p.97 UK edition) > 'Filch was looking triumphant. > "That vanishing cabinet was extremely valuable!" he was saying > gleefully to Mrs.Norris. "We'll have Peeves out this time, my sweet." > (ibid. p.98) > Tonks: Humm . not good. That means that for how many years that entrance to Hogwarts has been there? When did the vanishing cabinet first get to Hogwarts? Where did it come from? LV could have come into the castle and left Hufflepuff's cup as a horcrux in the trophy room. Right? Where is that cup? Who did LV kill for each of his horcruxes? DD tell us (HBP) that LV tried to make his horcrux killings significant. LV was going to use Harry's death to make the last Horcrux. But since he couldn't DD guesses that Nagini is the last one and it was made with the death of Frank Brice. We know that the 3 Riddles were killed when Tom was still a young man and maybe just out of Hogwarts. Here we have the horcruxes of the journal, the ring and the locket. According to DD there are 3 more. The last one is the snake (maybe). We need something from Hufflepuff and from Ravenclaw. The wand at Ollivander's must be the Ravenclaw wand. Who did LV kill for that one? And who did he kill for Hufflepuff? And there is an obvious problem here. There is nothing from Gryffindor. If we need one from Gryffindor then the snake can not be one. (unless the Journal was recycled somehow, but I don't think so.) Harry will have to find the real locket, which is probably still a horcrux since it can not be opened. Then Harry will have to find the wand that Ollivander took with him when he presumably went into hiding. Then Harry will have to find the Hufflepuff cup. And then the real question will be the 'last horcrux'. Sounds like a chapter title to me. If LV needed one more horcrux and he did not have one yet for Gryffindor, it makes sense that the murder of Harry at GH would have been the killing that he need to make that one. But what object was he going to use? Did he have it with him that night? What is it and where is it now? Does PP know? God help us, does Snape know?? That would put us back to Snape being there, and I don't think that he was. Wouldn't LV do his horcrux killings alone? None of his DE seem to know about the horcruxes, and a good thing too because what would prevent one of them from doing the same thing and becoming a political threat to LV. Tonks_op From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 11:08:24 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 04:08:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518110824.27426.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152446 Carol: We're talking about the 1930s. Merope does not have the option of abortion, nor the resources to take care of her child. maria8162001: Sorry Carol, if I have to respond to this one more time, I know you want to change the topic, but I just to say that. In 1930, though maybe not legal, but there was already an abortion in UK, even during the time of Queen Victoria (Victorian time). Abortion, predates that far, way far than Victorian times in England, though not legal, but rich and poor alike can already find an abortionist, though they were not called abortionist then, I guess. Carol: And so she should be condemned to starve to death in the streets of London, along with her unborn child? Why not just shoot her and put her out of her misery? Yes, she tricked him into taking the potion because she wanted to be loved, but she also confessed what she had done. And what she got was not Christian forgiveness but utter rejection and a broken heart. For her, it was a death sentence. That may be your idea of mercy and right conduct. I assure you, it is not mine. maria8162001: Merope wasn't condemned to death by anyone, she condemned herself to death. If she had wanted to, IMO, she could have find help from among her fellow witches/wizards, but she didn't asked for help from her own people whom, I believe would be willing to help her with her child or would be willing to care fro her child. But she didn't, she chose to die, you know why, not just because she was broken hearted and horrified at what she did and at the reaction of Tom, but also because she was selfish. All she could think of is herself. JMO. From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Thu May 18 16:59:50 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:59:50 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152447 Tonks wrote: > I was listening to the CD of HBP and first I want to encourage > everyone to get a copy from your local library and listen to it. > Listening is so much better for finding the small details. Things > just jumped out at me that I had forgotten. It is like a whole new > book in places. Now Najwa: I will do that, that sounds like a good idea. Tonks again: > Now while I was listening to the part where DD takes Harry to the > cave, it occurred to me just how dangerous that place was. And I > thought "wait a minute here is Harry the boy who must be kept safe > by all means possible and DD is taking him to this very dangerous > place". Najwa again: This is Harry's calling. He has to do this stuff and he has to battle Voldemort. I'm sure DD does not want him in harm's way, yet he does need to get used to this type of work and he never really is safe anyway. Look at all of the situations he has gotten into. DD does know that he is ill and probably won't last long, and I do think that he knows that Voldemort has a death wish for him, so Dumbledore knew that there wasn't much time for more coddling and protecting. Najwa From djklaugh at comcast.net Thu May 18 17:37:40 2006 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:37:40 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152448 (Snip) > Am I truly in a small minority of people who still really LIKES the > Potterverse? still guffaws at some of JKR's clever turns of phrase? > still marvels at her creativity? still shakes her head that this > writer can have us arguing after SIX books about whether a character > is evil, good, neither or both? > > Am I in a small minority of people who still actually LIKES Harry > himself? ::huffs on D'oH shield and glances at it sentimentally:: I don't think it's a small minority, Susan! I for one love the series and the characters and the creativity of JKR! These have become my very favorite "escape literature" books - just the thing for relieving stress, getting a giggle or just cozying up on a rainy afternoon. I'm hard pressed to come up with only one favorite scene - there are so many that either fascinated or amused me - like Hagrid crashing into the Hut-on-the-Rock, The Sea to give Harry his letter from Hogwarts and calling Vernon Dursley a "great prune". Or the absurdity of a giant-sized wizard having a pink umbrella with which he does magic. Or the image of Dudley with a pig's tail -- even so early on in the first book I knew Dudley was a dud and the pig's tail sure fit! And Fred and George playing the age-old twin switcheroo game on their mother at Platform 9 and 3/4. And that's just a few scenes from the first book! (snip) Hee. > Anybody else game? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan I agree about the richness of her characterization - not only of the characters but also of her characterizations of magic and the Wizarding World as a whole! Vernon Dursely's (paraphrase) "you people have a government? Well that explains a lot!" - and the meeting of Fudge and the Other Minister .... LOL The MOM with it's interesting departments and flying paper airplane memos! And the concept of Hogwarts castle as an important "character" for the series - what a hoot! I sure would love to have an opportunity to explore such a fascinating edifice!! Wouldn't you love to go tickle that pear to get into the kitchen and have the house elves bring you some Butterbeer and your favorite dessert? Or whisper "pine fresh" to go in and try out all the different types of bubble bath in the Prefects Bathroom? Or have a very intense, pressing need to hide something so that you could get into the Room of Requirement to explore all the things a 1000 years worth of students and staff have hidden there? Come on, admit it! Wouldn't you love to be at Hogwarts? Deb (aka djklaugh) I think it's time to read the series again ... for like the 10th time .... or is it the 32nd time? Where's my wand? And my invisibility cloak cuz the boss won't appreciate me reading these books at work *G* From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:11:47 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:11:47 -0000 Subject: 7 horcruxes = 7 deadly sins? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152449 The number seven has an interesting metaphysical and religious history I think. And considering how Voldemort is pure evil and maybe since I just recently watched the movie Seven, do you think the seven deadly sins are embedded in the horcruxes some how? Like perhaps each horcrux represents a deadly sin or perhaps the actual owner had been afflicted by them, or maybe perhaps a deadly sin was afflicting Voldemort at the time of creating the horcrux? Depending on who is afflicted with the sin, ie Voldie or his victims, this could help leading us into figuring out what they are. Just a thought.. Najwa From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:40:27 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:40:27 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152450 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "triinum" wrote: > So, all I can make of this is that Snape is a really kick-ass wizard > who's not taken by surprise with even non-verbal spells :-) > Or what? > Steven1965aaa: I think occulemency. That's why he tells Harry that his spells won't work until he learns to keep his mouth shut and his mind closed. From vedaal_nistar at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:11:41 2006 From: vedaal_nistar at yahoo.com (vedaal_nistar) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:11:41 -0000 Subject: Secure Communication among members of the Order of the Phoenix Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152451 Hello All, am new here ;-) My kids love discussing Harry Potter with me, and we are all avid fans. It just so happens, that among my other hobbies, I am very interested in encryption/authentication/PGP/GnuPG and have taught it to my kids. So, I was intrigued and pleasantly surprised to find that JKR came up with a very clever mode of magical secure communication: (JKR's official site: http://www.jkrowling.com/en/thankyou.cfm faq section // about the books // p 1 of 4 ) JKR writes in the FAQ that Dumbledore invented a method of communication using Patronuses [? Patroni ? ;-) ] and says that each Patronus is distinct to its Wizard/Witch, so there is no possibility of forgery. I don't remember where/which book this communication was used, anyone know where ? Also, [1] does the Patronus deliver a message by speaking,(unlikely), or by bringing a written message, as with Owl Post? [2] can the Patronus be fooled into delivering the message to a polyjuiced imposter? {This would be a major weakness in cryptographic protocol. ;-) } But could be made 'secure' by having the message be from Patronus to Patronus, and then having the receiving Patronus deliver the message to its Wizard/Witch. Since the receiving Patronus cannot be forged, this would constitute quite a secure crypto-system {and one that is definitely much better than current Muggle systems. ;-) } n.b. JKR writes in her biographical notes, that at one point she worked for Amnesty International, so it is quite possible that she may have been familiar with PGP crypto communication. Thoughts/Ideas/Comments ? :-) Thanks, All the Best, vedaal From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:43:34 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:43:34 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152452 > > Leslie41: > > That's fallacious reasoning. It's a non-sequitur. It doesn't > > necessarily follow that if these issues aren't dealt with that DD > > finds the abuse of children "good and noble" and "worthwhile." > > Lupinlore: > Of course it does, IMO. We are not dealing with just anyone here, > after all (although just anyone would have a lot to answer for). > Rather, we are dealing with "the epitome of goodness," the "very > wise man" who "knows everything that goes on at Hogwarts." Pretty > damning, if you ask me. Leslie41: Again, fallacious reasoning. Just because someone does not put a stop to something, that doesn't mean they APPROVE of it. > > Leslie41: > > But of course it is. Especially since what the Marauders do to > > Snape, or attempt to do, is far, far, worse than ANYTHING that > > Snape has ever done to his students. > Lupinlore: > I guess my answer to that would be, NOPE, what was done to Snape > was most certainly NOT, IMO, in the same league with what he does > to his students. The difference in position of authority between > Snape and Harry, IMO, magnifies Snape's actions far out of the > league of whatever was done to teenage Snape by the Marauders. Leslie41: And I would say when we judge his teaching style, we should consider the fact that Snape's students learn an awful lot as a result of his nastiness. As to Black, again I remind you, what Black was guilty of was ATTEMPTED MURDER. Which he never repented of, ever. So I would say you're right. It is not at all "in the same league" with what Snape does to his students. It's far, far, far worse. > > Leslie41: > > Snape was 15 once, too. He was humiliated, and then nearly > > killed, and neither Lupin nor DD held Sirius and James > > accountable. (Certainly Black wasn't expelled, which one might > > expect when one student attempts to murder another.) Black even > > became a valued member of the Order. > Lupinlore: > I think this is absolutely and totally irrelevent. Nothing that > was done to Snape, by omission or commission, in any way excuses > his abuse of Harry and Neville or IN ANY WAY releases him from > punishment for that reprehensible abuse. Nor does it in any way > lessen Dumbledore's fault in allowing the abuse to take place and > continue. Leslie41: Ah, but that's not really my point. My point is that you wish to heap blame only on Snape and Dumbledore as a result of the "abuse" of Snape's students, yet when Snape is the target of the torment, you defend his abusers and seem to hold their friends blameless. If your name is any indication you admire Lupin. Yet Lupin never makes his friends accountable for what they have done, which is torment and almost kill a fellow student. Lupin even diminishes the seriousness of Black's actions by calling it a "prank". What about Lupin's "fault in allowing the abuse to take place and continue"? Does he bear no responsibility at all? Does he not have a duty to speak up and tell his friends that they are being cruel? And murderous? Lily certainly speaks up, and we admire her for doing so. Lupin holds his tongue. I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I know why Lupin didn't speak out, and I understand and am sympathetic with his reasons. Personally, I give all of them a lot of slack, Snape, Black, etc. But you doggedly focus on Snape's perceived abuses to the exclusion of the abuse done to him, and to me this seems inconsistent, I think, to the point of hypocrisy. From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:43:54 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:43:54 -0000 Subject: 7 horcruxes = 7 deadly sins? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152453 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > The number seven has an interesting metaphysical and religious history I think. And considering how Voldemort is pure evil and maybe since I just recently watched the movie Seven, do you think the seven deadly sins are embedded in the horcruxes some how? Like perhaps each horcrux represents a deadly sin or perhaps the actual owner had been afflicted> by them, or maybe perhaps a deadly sin was afflicting Voldemort at the time of creating the horcrux? Depending on who is afflicted with the sin, ie Voldie or his victims, this could help leading us into figuring out what they are. > Just a thought.. > > Najwa > Steven1965aaa: 6 Horocruxes, not 7. 7 soul pieces, 1 within Voldemort. But your point is valid nonetheless as it pertains to the significance of Number 7 throughout the books. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu May 18 18:04:52 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:04:52 -0000 Subject: A Cauldron of Amortentia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152454 Potioncat: *(snip)* > Claimant: "Judge, My wife doesn't look so good since I found out she was slipping love potion into my tea and I starting coffee. What can I do?" Judge: "Drink the tea! Next case!" *(snip)* When I read it the first time, I thought the potion (Amortentia) revealed your true love, but that isn't what canon says. Canon says it's the most powerful love potion and that it's smell depends on each person. So, how does it work? And did it show us who each of the trio really love? Ceridwen: I had to keep that example of the WW's Divorce Court! It was funny. I thought the same as you, that Amortentia somehow dug up the scents associated with the one we love - example: Hermione's litany of seductive scents - and affects our consciousness with them so we're hyper aware of the other person. But, now that you point it out, that isn't what it said after all, that is what I was led down the garden path to believing through the examples. So, of course Harry would smell something he associates with the Burrow. He's had good times there, and made strong friendships which are associated with that place. There are fanfics out there that have Ginny giving Harry love potion. This may be where they got the idea. But, if the smells are that subjective, then perhaps Harry's feelings for Ginny are more because he associates her with the Burrow, rather than her dosing him with a potion? I realize this might mean that Harry is associating Ginny with the Burrow as an object that belongs there rather than as Ginny His True Love. But I don't quite trust Rowling's interviews. I don't think she spills anything having to do with the next book in her interviews, so keeps to the story lines we already know. So when she says Ginny is Harry's soulmate, or whatever it was she said along those lines (perfect match?), I keep thinking that this applies up til and including HBP, but might not necessarily reflect reality in book 7. Hm. Just thinking along, Harry had that monster in his chest, Hermione sicced birds on Ron, could it be that Amortentia has a negative effect on the people who smell it, even long after it is no longer physically present? Monsters and attack canaries are certainly not positive! Ceridwen. From megs0124 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 19:26:03 2006 From: megs0124 at yahoo.com (Megan) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 19:26:03 -0000 Subject: 7 horcruxes = 7 deadly sins? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152455 "Najwa"> wrote: > > > > The number seven has an interesting metaphysical and religious > history I think. And considering how Voldemort is pure evil and > maybe since I just recently watched the movie Seven, do you think > the seven deadly sins are embedded in the horcruxes some how? Like > perhaps each horcrux represents a deadly sin or perhaps the actual > owner had been afflicted> by them, or maybe perhaps a deadly sin was > afflicting Voldemort at the time of creating the horcrux? Depending > on who is afflicted with the sin, ie Voldie or his victims, this > could help leading us into figuring out what they are. > > Just a thought.. > > > > Najwa > > > Steven1965aaa: > > 6 Horocruxes, not 7. 7 soul pieces, 1 within Voldemort. But your > point is valid nonetheless as it pertains to the significance of > Number 7 throughout the books. > I have not posted in a LONG time due to time/lack of internet/and graduation/job searching but feel the need to comment on the number 7. 7 (in literature) means Perfection, the perfect number. To Lord Voldy, this would be the perfect number for him to choose in splitting his soul. It is a number of power, of perfection, a magical number. It is the number of completion. It means luck to many cultures so why not "add" to his power by performing this act to this number's extent? If you want to look at it another way, seven also represents the month of July, Harry's Birth month. Lord Voldy of course did not know this when starting his Horocruxes but what better person to perform the final splitting of his soul (7th peice) than to someone born in the 7th Month. When did he attempt to kill Harry? 7 is the number of the 7 Deadly Sins, as well as the number of Sacraments. It is the number of heads of the Beast in Revelations. 7 is a strong number thoughout literature, the Bible, Religion and Cultures all over the Globe. It is easy to recognize because it has common meanings in so many different things. Lord Voldy is a perverse creature (I won't call him a man) and by distorting such a powerful and holy number would add to the perverse and horrible act behind creating these horocruxes. It adds to its power. There will be 7 Books in this series. There were 7 rings in the LOTR Trilogy (3 another powerful number- Trinity). Megan- *goes back into Lurkdom after her brief message [:)] * [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 19:42:49 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 19:42:49 -0000 Subject: Hags and "hag-rid" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152456 In an attempt to answer my own request to find amusing topics that won't cause contention among list members (and failing to find anything about goats and magic that was worth exploring in relation to Aberforth), I turned to etymologies. We've been told by the Lexicon that "Hagrid" (cf. "haggard") means what it appears to mean, "ridden by hags," and that it's an old name for sleep paralysis ("the sensation of being held immobile in bed"), but I suspected a further connection between hags and succubi, the haglike female spirits who were believed in medieval times to cause nightmares, so I consulted the Online Etymology Dictionary (also used by the Lexicon compilers, as it's very useful and derived from authoritative sources): http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?l=h There's a lot of interesting information on hags (which in the HP books seem to to me represent the stereotyped view of witches as ugly old women who eat, if not children, then raw liver). Etymologically, the word derives (as the Lexicon says) from the Old English word "haegtesse," which (the Lexicon to the contrary) does *not* mean "hedge rider" but "witch" or "Fury" (like the three Furies in Greek mythology) plus an unknown suffix. (There is, however, a possible connection in the suffix with an Old Norse word that translates literally as "hedge rider" and was used for witches and ghosts and the Old English term may have developed that sense later when the influence of paganism was fading.) More interesting to me is the absence of a male form for the word "haegtesse" and its use in Old English for "a woman of prophetic or oracular powers." The source notes that diviners and soothsayers were always female in European paganism, so there's a link here with Sibyll (or Sybill, depending on whether you have the American or British editions) Trelawney and her great-great-grandmother Cassandra (whose first names also indicate their "seeress" connection). The dictionary notes that the Anglo-Saxon historian Aelfric used the word to translate the Greek word for the oracle at Delphi, which translates literally as "Pythoness"--so, a connection between seers and snakes, along with the witch/hag/seer connection inherent in the word "haegtesse" itself. To return to Hagrid and the idea of a sleeper being "ridden" by such beings. In the Middle Ages, nightmares were believed to be caused by incubi (the Late Latin word for "nightmare" was "incubo," literally one who lies down on the sleeper"). Incubi were demons who caused a feeling of suffocation in the sleeper. The word "nightmare" ("night" plus "mare," meaning "incubus) referred to the same demons, who were regarded as female. Later, the word "succubus" was used for the female demons who "rode" male sleepers, with a definite sexual connotation not necessarily present in the original sense of the word (or in JKR's use of "hag-rid"). By the mid-sixteenth century, "nightmare" had come to mean the suffocating sensation caused by such spirits (sleep paralysis?), and by 1829, when few if any Englishmen or -women believed in incubi or succubi, the word had come to mean any bad dream. I still can't find any direct etymological connection between hags and succubi/incubi, but the concept appears to be the same: a hag "rides" the sleeper and causes sleep paralysis/ a sense of suffocation/ nightmares, resulting in a "hagrid"/"haggard" appearance. (Could Draco's appearance be described as "hagrid," erm, "haggard," when he's evidently suffering from sleep deprivation in HBP? How about Lupin's after a transformation?) Since JKR invented Hagrid very early in the series, at a point when Harry was an infant and her prospective readers, if any, were visualized as children of, say, ten or eleven, I doubt very much that she had the sexual connotations of incubi or succubi in mind, but I'm certain that she had a private little laugh imagining the gigantic Hagrid "ridden" by hags (in a nonsexual way), one of her many little plays on words (cf. the "griffin door" knocker and the names of the various textbook authors). Note that she has softened (bowdlerized, Kemper?) hags as well, from the evil creatures who eat children in the Grimms' fairy tales (anyone know whether the witch is called a hag in the original German?) to ugly old women who eat raw liver. (Sanguini the Vampire seems equally harmless though I'm unsure why she's bowdlerized Vampires in a book where evil creatures are starting to appear, unless, again, it's to eliminate the sexual connotations.) Which reminds me: Has anyone read Bram Stoker's "Dracula" (not just watched the movie)? I haven't, but I understand that it contains a "mind bond" between Dracula and one of his victims resulting from an exchange of blood. Possible influence on the Voldemort/Harry mind connection and the blood exchange in GoF here, even though in this case the bond predates Voldemort's use of Harry's blood? Carol, not sure that any of this contributes to our understanding of the books but interested in the ways in which JKR adapts traditional materials and plays with language From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu May 18 20:20:27 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:20:27 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152458 > Magpie: > So let me get this straight. Knowing the difference between love > and infatuation and obsession (or the effects of a Love Potion you > don't know exists) is such a character-tainting thing not to know > that Tom's not knowing the difference makes him at fault for his own > exploitation by another person (an exploitation he is completely > unaware of). However Merope, because she's "ignorant" gets a total > pass on thinking she's in love with Tom, and also a pass on thinking > that drugging a person and enslaving him is okay if you love them. Pippin: Goodness me, no! Did I say all that? The question was in what sense, if any, Merope could be called a victim. My answer was, because she was deserted by her husband, who failed to fulfill his legal obligation to support her and their child. That does not exclude Tom from being a victim as well. I wouldn't say Merope didn't deserve Azkaban for improper use of magic and violating the secrecy act. I'm not giving her a pass. In modern times Tom would have no obligation to stay in the marriage and I hope he would be granted an annulment by any reasonable court. But I am talking about the laws and customs of 1926 or thereabouts. In those days, as near as I can determine, marriages were regarded as sacred and considered valid until proved otherwise. The grounds for proving lack of consent through duress or fraud were painfully narrrow, the interest of the state was in preserving the marriage over the welfare of the partners, and the burden of proof was on the petitioner. It would not have been enough for Tom to prove that he didn't really love or desire Merope, because lack of desire did not invalidate a marriage. He would have had to prove that he consented only because of "force and fear" and it would have had to have been physical. He would probably have been laughed out of court if he claimed he had been in emotional bondage, however it had been induced. Tom knew, or should have known, that he was consenting to all this when he got married, and I see no canon that he was incapable of withholding his consent or that he was so overcome by the potion that he didn't know what he was doing. By the laws and customs of his time, Merope had the right to her husband's support if he had the means to do it unless the marriage was proved to be invalid. I am not saying she had *earned* the right. We have rights to all sorts of things we have done nothing to deserve. But legally, and, by the morals of her time, morally, she was wronged, IMO. > Magpie: > Actually, we know that love itself makes one find another person > attractive, and since this potion is a "love potion" and not a "find > me attractive" potion I'd say it's more likely that that's what it > produces. Pippin: According to Slughorn, the potion does not produce feelings of love -- it produces feelings of obsession and infatuation. As much of the novel turns on the difference between love and such feelings, I think it has to be relevant whether there was any way Tom could have distinguished between love and infatuation before taking such a solemn and in his time nearly irrevocable step as marriage. Canon suggests that had he been willing to wait, Merope would have tired of his make-believe passion and revealed herself before she became pregnant. Canon implies the villagers believed Tom's talk of being "hoodwinked" referred to a fake pregnancy, because that was the readiest explanation for his hasty marriage. Dumbledore says that what Tom really meant was that he was enchanted, but is it not valid to ask whether the enchantment produced the haste as well as the desire? Magpie Tom then acted on those feelings of love the way that he, > Tom, would normally act on feelings of love--he asked the girl in > question to marry him rather than any other number of things he > could have done. Merope is responsible for actions that he took in > good faith due to the artificial situation she created. Just as, if > she had given Tom a Potion to make him think the house was on fire > and he jumped out the window to escape the flames, she would be > responsible for his death by falling despite the fact that she > didn't physically force him to jump out the window. Pippin: Your example illustrates my point very well. If Tom had consented in fear of his life, he would have been entitled to an annulment in 1926. But I don't think people would have recognized artificial emotional attachment as a problem, because they didn't see the lack of attachment as invalidating the marriage. He might have done better to claim that Merope didn't tell him she was a witch, but it would still be hard, IMO, for him to prove that he wouldn't have married her if he'd known that. Pippin From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 20:35:34 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:35:34 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152459 > >>Magpie: > > Personally, I've never much longed to spend time in the WW > either. The books never captured my imagination in terms of my > just loving them and wanting to read them over and over etc. I > was just drawn to the fandom because I felt compelled to talk > about them. I think Elkins has put this better, but basically > it's the conflict I constantly feel about the books that makes me > need to talk about them and work them out. I like doing that. Betsy Hp: I'm not a big fan of the Wizarding World either. No works of fiction, no plays, little music, constant fear of exposure, and *very* uncomfortable modes of travel all add up to a big "no thanks" on my end. Which is weird, because usually in books of this sort I *long* to drop down the rabbit hole. But the WW does the astonishing and makes me quite pleased to be a Muggle. And another thing that I find odd: Generally I'm not a fan of books that force a certain morality down the reader's throat. And yet, I find myself chafing at what I see as a lack of expressed morality in these books. I don't want the heroes to be goody-two-shoes, but I'm bothered by what the "good guys" are able to do without blinking an eye. (Hermione's face branding is a rather large example of that for me. I lost most, if not all, of my respect for her as a character because of her not even commenting on that.) Have the books soured on me a bit? They have. At least, I'm not as fond of the "good guys" as I used to be. I wouldn't want to hang out with them, and quite a few I'd actively avoid. I still like Harry, but his darkness has always been a part of his character, and he seems to at least acknowledge when he goes too far. This may be part of the story-telling craft, showing us the good guys at their worst, the whole darkest before the dawn, thing. And book 7 may turn it all around for me. I *was* thrilled with how JKR handled Draco. So, despite JKR's very off-putting (IMO) interviews and articles, I still have hope that the series will end well. Betsy Hp (eyeing the "sexy Snape" red flag, SSSusan waved, and contemplating going there ) From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu May 18 20:44:57 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:44:57 -0000 Subject: My favorite moments: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152461 Geoff; I have two sorts of favourite moments. One type is the sort where I laugh out loud - much to the annoyance of my other half who isn't into the books; the second sort is one of those serious moments which stick in your mind forever. Two examples, first one of my favourite funny scenes: '"Yes, as I was saying, Potter, Professor Lupin thought you showed a pronounced aptitude for the subject and obviously for an Auror -" "Did you not understand my note, Minerva?" asked Professor Umbridge in honeyed tones, quite forgetting to cough. "Of course I understood it," said Professor McGonagall, her teeth clenched so tightly the words came out a little muffled. "Well, then, I am confused... I'm afraid I don't quite understand how you can give Mr.Potter false hope that -" "False hope?" repeated Professor McGonagall, still refusing to look round at Professor Umbridge. "He has achieved high marks in all his Defence Against the Dark Arts tests -" "I'm terribly sorry to have to contradict you, Minerva, but as you see from my note, Harry has been achieving very poor results in his classes with me -" "I should have made my meaning plainer," said Professor McGonagall, turning at last to look Umbridge directly in the eyes. "He has achieved high marks in all Defence Against the Dark Arts tests set by a competent teacher." Professor Umbridge smile vanished as suddenly as a light bulb blowing.' (OOTP "Careers Advice" p.585 UK edition) And a sentence which always speaks volumes to me: 'The sun had set before he realised he was cold. He got up and returned to the castle, wiping his face on his sleeve as he went.' (OOTP "The Second War Begins" p.754 UK edition) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 20:53:45 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:53:45 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152462 SSSusan wrote: > You know, I've recently been bemoaning the fact, offlist to a couple > of folks, that there seems to be a tendency to focus a LOT on real > life morality when we discuss the Potterverse these days. That's > not always a bad thing... it's certainly natural to draw parallels > to the life we lead... but sometimes it almost seems like we just > can't have FUN with the books and characters, can't JOSH about > things, without a RL "standard" or "judgment" being handed down. > > I mean, would anyone dare suggest Snape is sexy here? Come on, tell > the truth! Would anyone?? And I don't mean Rickman!Snape either. > It *has* been done here before, you know, people talking about Snape > being sexy and why.... Carol responds: Without going into detail here, I think there *is* something sexy about Snape, certainly something compelling for certain female readers (not all, obviously!). I think in part it's the elements of the hero of a gothic romance--the mystery, the dressing in black, the sweeping black cloak--and in part the sheer intellect and power. (I sensed from the very first book, and particularly after he made a fool of Lockhart in the duelling club chapter of CoS, that he was much more skilled and talented than he appeared to Harry, a judgment borne out by the Wolfsbane Potion in PoA, the number of hexes he knew before he even came to school (GoF), the revelation in OoP that he's a "superb Occlumens," and all the invented spells, potions shortcuts, healing powers, Legilimency, nonverbal spells, and duelling skills revealed in HBP. His voice, often soft and sometimes "dangerous," his sarcasm (yes, it can be cruel, but it's often clever, much more so than the insults that other characters use on each other), his unSlytherinlike courage in, for example, revealing his Dark Mark to the recalcitrant Fudge, the poetry of some of his speeches--all of those things cause the (female) reader who likes Snape, or is at least fascinated by him and leaning toward a DDM! position, to overlook details like yellow teeth and greasy hair (shared by Sirius Black in PoA) and to focus on things like his long-fingered hands (shared by Dumbledore and Voldemort and possibly an indication of magical power), the curtains of black hair (minus the grease), the inscrutable expression, and so on. Clearly Narcissa--proud, rich, beautiful, pureblood Narcissa-- doesn't consider him repellant in HBP, shedding tears on his chest, putting her face close to hers, seizing her hand in both of his and kissing it. Now, granted, she's distraught and she regards him as her only hope, but I can't see her doing those things if he looked like Mad-Eye Moody, or for that matter, Dolohov. Also, Snape is young for an adult character (oddly, JKR refers to Lupin, who is the same age as Snape, as "quite young" in both PoA and OoP but never does so with Snape). He is in his prime, apparently in superb physical condition (probably from all the stair-climbing as he prowls the halls at night)--an intelligent, powerful, gifted, and mysterious young man. If Bill, with his scarred face, can still be sexy, why not the hook-nosed Snape, who is only described as "greasy" from the PoV of Harry and others who hate him? He also has some of the appeal of the "misunderstood" hero shared by Sirius Black. Whether that particular attraction will be undermined or reinforced by Book 7 remains to be seen. SSS: > But more to the point, I suppose, in listening to some folks talking > about HP and the online forums, it struck me that a lot of people > don't seem to write about the FUN they find in the books, the JOY of > Harry Potter or JKR's world. > > So how 'bout it? > > Am I truly in a small minority of people who still really LIKES the > Potterverse? still guffaws at some of JKR's clever turns of phrase? > still marvels at her creativity? still shakes her head that this > writer can have us arguing after SIX books about whether a character > is evil, good, neither or both? Carol: Just briefly here, I like the moments of humor that seem to spring out of nowhere. For some reason, I found Fred's "Shut up, Weatherby" (GoF) hilarious the first time I read it, and I love Luna's lunacy (not so much her imaginary creatures and ailments--I can take or leave Nargles and Loser's Lurgy--but her outrageous theories and unexpected perspective, my favorite being the Rotfang Conspiracy to bring down the MoM through a combination of Dark magic and gum disease. And Hermione, the daughter of two dentists, missed out on that one! > SSS: > Am I in a small minority of people who still actually LIKES Harry > himself? Carol: I can't speak for anyone else, but I like Harry most of the time, even though I think he's (quite understandably) mistaken about Snape, and I worry when he's tempted by Unforgiveable Curses, particularly Crucio. He's suffered that excruciating pain himself at least three times that I can recall. How can he even think of inflicting it on someone else, no matter how much he hates them? That way madness lies, if Barty Jr. is any indication. SSS: > How 'bout we -- without succumbing to a series of just one-liners -- > talk about what we LOVE about the books? what we find FUN about > them, even after all this time? Carol: I agree with you that characterization is one of JKR's skills. Most of her characters are memorable and consistent. Snape, love him or hate him, is "a gift of a character" that most of us won't soon forget. Ron and Hermione, despite their flaws, are very human and recognizable characters. Neville is just lovable, and his growth from the first book to the fifth (we don't see much of him in the sixth) is admirable. His confrontation with Bellatrix in the MoM brings tears to my eyes. And the death of Cedric, the ultimate Hufflepuff, loyal and sportsmanlike and kind and brave, makes me cry every time I read it. My heart breaks for his parents, especially his mother, whose loss is so deep, so devastating, so irreparable, that she can't even weep for him. Some people would say that plotting is her biggest strength, and certainly she can drop clues and red herrings and withhold information to keep us reading and wondering, but we don't go back to the first five books for the mystery plot, and the mysteries in HBP are compounded, not resolved. Now, yes, we want to read Book 7 to find out what happens, to get answers to our questions, to feel a sense of resolution instead of nagging anxiety for the fate of our favorite characters, but barring a solution so unsatisfactory to a particular reader that he or she wants nothing more than to dump the entire series in the nearest recycle bin, we won't go back for the events, even those that still make our hearts beat with fear even when we know what's going to happen (to the extent that Harry knows and understands it). I go back to the books *now* looking for clues and trying to figure out meaning and motivation, but that won't be the main reason I go back once the final book is out, even if JKR leaves some questions unanswered and some issues unresolved or open-ended. I can't speak for anyone else, but if I come back after the seventh book, satisfied that she's given a plausible explanation for Snape and has not violated what I consider to be the moral integrity of her world by having Harry kill Voldemort with an Unforgiveable Curse, it will be to return to the company of people I love, despite all the faults and frailities that make them so real, to laugh and cry with them, to share their world, which for all its violence and prejudice and inadequate lighting, is in many ways a more interesting place than the mundane world I live in, with its unpaid bills and computer problems and irascible, demanding, semiliterate clients. I think that's the answer, really. I love the world that JKR created, and like Harry, I'd rather be at Hogwarts than at Privet Drive. It's a magical world, and when I read the books or think about the characters, I believe in it and them, "the willing suspension of disbelief that constitues poetic faith." Carol, who answered these questions without a clue as to where they would take her From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:46:25 2006 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:46:25 -0000 Subject: (nvbl) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152463 > steven: > I was wondering, why did JKR take pains to make it clear > that levicorpus is a nonverbal spell? It could be a meaningless > detail, but maybe not. > > we know James used the Spell, and we know that Snape invented it. > How did James learn the spell? Since its nvbl, he did not hear > Snape say it and copy him. He could only have learned it from the > HBP potions book. How did he get his hands on Snape's potions book? > Snape was sharing it with Lily, which accounts for Slughorn's > repeated references to her potions ability. This is a valid idea, and one of my guesses too. However, there are some "but"s. Snape only could have shared the book with Lily in their N.E.W.T. class (6th year). James used the levicorpus spell on Snape in their 5th year, right after the O.W.L.s. In fact, Lupin told Harry that the spell was very popular :"There were a few months in my fifth year when you couldn't move for being hoisted into the air by your ankle" (HBP, 336 US, 315 UK). Snape certainly had the book all the time (it was his mother's) and read it and wrote in it long before he was in Slughorn's N.E.W.T. class, but as for sharing it with Lily, I'm just not sure. Even if they had potions class together before the 6th year, they didn't study by this book (Harry and Ron had to buy theirs for the N.E.W.T. class). What I mean to say is that the idea of sharing the book implies some kind of out-of-class interaction between Snape and Lily, and I don't see what that could be. They do have some interest clubs at Hogwarts, though. In OotP a Gobstones Club is mentioned, and although a Charms Club. Could there be a Potions Club? I don't know if Snape would be interested in such a thing, he is not very much into socializing. I thought about Snape/Lily thing a lot. When I was reading the book, I was even wondering if Lily's brilliance in potions was the same kind of "brilliance" that Harry displays all of a sudden in HBP. But when I finished it, I realized that Lily couldn't have "cheated" the way Harry did, just because, unlike Harry, she was tought by the same teacher in her O.W.L.s and in her N.E.W.T.s class, and he would surely notice the difference. zanooda > trin: > Strange how Snape recognized and shielded the Levicorpus before it > hit him zanooda: Snape is an "accomplished Legilimens", he doesn't need to hear the words in order to know what's coming, especially from Harry, IMO From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu May 18 21:02:20 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:02:20 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152464 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: Betsy Hp: > Have the books soured on me a bit? They have. At least, I'm not as > fond of the "good guys" as I used to be. I wouldn't want to hang > out with them, and quite a few I'd actively avoid. I still like > Harry, but his darkness has always been a part of his character, and > he seems to at least acknowledge when he goes too far. Geoff: I don't think that Harry possesses an exceptional darkness. We ae seeing the "good" characters moving from na?ve little First Years for whom the Wizarding World is still a place of wonder into middle adolescence where their world view is widening and the blacks and whites of childhood become the greys of adulthood. I have often said that I can identify with Harry because I remember my own teenage years - sometimes vividly even now. Can anyone on the group, hands on heart, claim to have been angels of light in those years, or even now? Harry's darkness is no more than that of any teenager. We all have - or had - moments of darkness and did or thought things which we later regretted. Even now, I still think thoughts which I know are stupid or reckless or jealous and they still sometimes get translated into actions which I later want to retract but can't. That doesn't place me on the Dark side unless I welcome them and want to extend those thoughts and actions. That is one area which, for me as a Christian, I need to seek continual redemption and forgiveness. I am glad that Harry is not squeaky clean, that he loses his temper, does thoughtless and uncaring things; it merely points him up as an average and normal member of fallen humanity. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 21:22:05 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:22:05 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152465 > >>SSSusan: > > I mean, would anyone dare suggest Snape is sexy here? Come on, > tell the truth! Would anyone?? And I don't mean Rickman!Snape > either. It *has* been done here before, you know, people talking > about Snape being sexy and why.... > Betsy Hp: Okay, I'm about to channel my inner-Pansy here, unleash my simpering girly-girlness, and horrify JKR, but... Oh, my Lord, yes, yes, a thousand times yes! Snape is so very, incredibly, mind meltingly sexy, IMO. I am completely and totally positive that there is a strong and healthy Snape fanclub at Hogwarts. Probably tilted towards Slytherins, but with its fair share of Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs, and even a few rogue Gryffindors bravely defying their house's bias. And no, it's not Rickman. (Though I do like Rickman, I think he was mis-cast in this role. He's too old, unfortunately. And too tall, though that could have been handled, but especially against Gary Oldman's Sirius... and I'm totally slipping into movie stuff, so I'll stop .) But yeah, smart gets me every time, and Snape has smarts in buckets. Plus he's got that amazing wit he's so not afraid to use. (Sometimes when he shouldn't, I'll admit.) And to dredge up Sydney's Jogging!Snape, he's also in incredible shape (running from the dungeon to the top of the astronomy tower and then back down, still able to cower werewolves and fend off pissed off students...) and wonderfully skilled with his wand. (my inner-Pansy is giggling madly...) But, speaking of his wand, and I'll try to dredge up some intelligence for this part of the post (girly-girl *and* intelligent? Can it be done!?!), one of the things that is so interesting about Snape as a character is he's such a combination of male and female qualities. He's good with a wand and with a cauldron. He's an amazing dueler, very able to get physical when the demand is there. But he's also a Potions master, head of Slytherin (the water) house, and will use the more female type of verbal attack if need be. (The scene where Snape gathers the other teachers together to drive Lockhart from their midst would be an example.) IIRC there was a very interesting post a while back on the ways Snape embodied the stereotypical *witch* aspects. And of course, JKR as a master of hurt/comfort with her guys, doesn't spare Snape. So there's that going for him, too. > >>Alla: > > But funnily enough I was talking to somebody off list about > sexiness of the characters and I probably mentioned it on list in > the past, but I really do NOT find any of the adult characters > sexy. Honestly, I don't. > And I am not just talking about Snape, I am also talking about > Sirius, who I love dearly as a character, and whom I think would > have been a loyal friend after a lot of therapy sessions :) > I don't know why. I mean, Sirius IS describes as physically > attractive, but I guess not my type. > Betsy Hp: And I'm the opposite. I find so many of JKR's male characters to be quite attractive. I think, probably because of the hurt/comfort thing, if I'm being totally honest (to my inner-Pansy who's feelings would be hurt if I lied during a good girly dish like this ). Sirius and Lupin and Snape (of course) all strike me as yummy, even if I'm not always a big fan of their actions. They all suffer so well. The funny thing is that I *never* thought Lockhart was sexy. At all. Did anybody, I wonder? Because, while he was described as being physically attractive, his personality was off-putting from the start. And JKR didn't give us anything to work with. I wonder how he'd have come across if the books were written from Hermione's pov? Hermione *must* have interperted Lockhart's actions completely differently from Harry for her to keep her crush for so long. Would that have passed on to us as readers, I wonder? (I suspect JKR would have still left him exposed as a fraud from the get-go, with the reader feeling a sort of fond sympathy for Hermione's crush.) So yeah, when it comes to her male characters, JKR's got me. Betsy Hp From belviso at attglobal.net Thu May 18 21:33:59 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:33:59 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152466 > Pippin: > Goodness me, no! Did I say all that? The question was in what sense, > if any, Merope could be called a victim. My answer was, because she > was deserted by her husband, who failed to fulfill his legal obligation > to support her and their child. That does not exclude Tom from > being a victim as well. I wouldn't say Merope didn't deserve Azkaban > for improper use of magic and violating the secrecy act. I'm not giving > her a pass. Magpie: Ah--I see then, sorry about that. Presumably if Merope had been able to pass herself off as a Muggle and bring Tom up on charges, he'd have been stuck. Pippin: > Tom knew, or should have known, that he was consenting to all > this when he got married, and I see no canon that he was incapable > of withholding his consent or that he was so overcome by the potion > that he didn't know what he was doing. Magpie: Yes, I think he did know, and made the promise to fulfill those vows in good faith. It was the basis for his making the promise that was false, not the promise itself. Pippin: > > By the laws and customs of his time, Merope had the right to her > husband's support if he had the means to do it unless the marriage > was proved to be invalid. I am not saying she had *earned* the right. > We have rights to all sorts of things we have done nothing to deserve. > But legally, and, by the morals of her time, morally, she was wronged, > IMO. Magpie: Actually, I would amend that to say that by the morals of Tom's Britain he was a legal husband with responsibilities. Merope is not a citizen of Tom's Britain, however. By the laws of her time and place, she may have had nothing of the sort. Her own country would have seen her as what she was: a witch who'd used probably illegal magic on a Muggle. According to Tom's Britain Merope probably didn't legally exist at all except on her marriage certificate. > Pippin: > According to Slughorn, the potion does not produce feelings of > love -- it produces feelings of obsession and infatuation. As much > of the novel turns on the difference between love and such feelings, > I think it has to be relevant whether there was any way Tom could > have distinguished between love and infatuation before taking such > a solemn and in his time nearly irrevocable step as marriage. > > Canon suggests that had he been willing to wait, Merope would have > tired of his make-believe passion and revealed herself before she > became pregnant. Magpie: Well, yes, but I don't see how that has any relevence to Tom's situation. It still all hinges on Merope stopping the Potion. He couldn't very well be expected to know he ought to wait until the woman he loves stops feeding him a Potion that's causing the feelings of love he thinks are genuine. Pippin: > Canon implies the villagers believed Tom's talk of being "hoodwinked" > referred to a fake pregnancy, because that was the readiest explanation > for his hasty marriage. Dumbledore says that what Tom > really meant was that he was enchanted, but is it not valid to > ask whether the enchantment produced the haste as well as the > desire? Magpie: I think it's as fine a question as any to wonder about Love Potions, in general, but I don't know that it makes any difference to Tom's position. If what Tom felt had been a natural emotion of Tom's there would be no reason he should have to wait a certain amount of time before acting on it. Falling out of love or getting over his infatuation when he was already married would still be very different than a Love Potion wearing off, I think. Tom himself seems to feel the difference keenly. > Pippin: > Your example illustrates my point very well. If Tom had consented > in fear of his life, he would have been entitled to an annulment > in 1926. But I don't think people would have recognized artificial > emotional attachment as a problem, because they didn't see the lack > of attachment as invalidating the marriage. He might have done > better to claim that Merope didn't tell him she was a witch, but it > would still be hard, IMO, for him to prove that he wouldn't have > married her if he'd known that. Magpie: Right, but that's one of many different angles to look at it from. Tom, as a Muggle, had a lot of things working against him. His own society would not know what was going on, so couldn't judge it accurately. In his society he would pretty much just have to divorce the girl. But Merope isn't subject to the laws and customs of Tom's time, so in this case it's her society who would be the only ones who really saw what was going on. They could easily identify the Love Potion. Btw, not that you mentioned this, but that's why I think talk of her not being able to have an abortion or a divorce because of the year is irrelevent. There's no reason to think that Merope would be at all effected socially by a divorce from Tom, and traditionally abortion Potions are probably the first thing one associates with the idea of witchcraft. That is, Old Wives Tales are all obsessed with female matters, and causing miscarriages is a big one. I can't imagine she'd have to be seeking out a Muggle doctor for any reason. I can't imagine that in her world, miscarriage Potions wouldn't be real. Not that that is brought up in canon, but her story doesn't turn on Merope's problems stemming from pregnancy. The baby doesn't seem to factor into either of the parents' decisions. He's only important for who he is as a person himself. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 21:49:46 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:49:46 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152467 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > I still like Harry, but his darkness has always been a part of > > his character, and he seems to at least acknowledge when he goes > > too far. > >>Geoff: > I don't think that Harry possesses an exceptional darkness. Betsy Hp: I agree. > >>Geoff: > We ae seeing the "good" characters moving from na?ve little First > Years for whom the Wizarding World is still a place of wonder into > middle adolescence where their world view is widening and the > blacks and whites of childhood become the greys of adulthood. > > Harry's darkness is no more than that of any teenager. > Betsy Hp: Again, I agree. Harry does bad things at times. He has from the moment we met him (as a personality) in PS/SS. They weren't horrible things, and if he was wrong, he'd feel guilt and struggle with what he was feeling. Harry can, for example, lose his temper and lash out. I *like* that about him, because it's very, very human. And it doesn't scare me or turn me off because, usually, he recognizes when he's behaved badly, and will either apologize (when it's a hurt Ron and Hermione) or feel horrified (when it's near death Draco). So I see that Harry is wrestling with these issues. And I like that. But with Hermione for example, she caused a classmate to walk around with an apparently permanent brand on her face. And has it given Hermione a moments pause? Not that we've seen. Of course, this could be the limitation of pov. We see Harry struggle because we get a peek inside his head. But JKR could have easily given us a scene where either Marietta walks by in her mask, or Hermione is told that the brand is still there, and we at least see Hermione pause or something. Anything to suggest that Hermione is at least wrestling with her actions. Instead we get nothing and we're left to believe that Hermione is just fine with disfiguring a classmate. Which turns me off of Hermione. Suddenly, I really don't care for her anymore. > >>Geoff: > I am glad that Harry is not squeaky clean, that he loses his > temper, does thoughtless and uncaring things; it merely points him > up as an average and normal member of fallen humanity. Betsy Hp: Again, I absolutely agree. What bothers me is that some of the "good characters" (not Harry) have done some disturbing things and it doesn't seem to bother them. They haven't just gotten muddy. They're rolling in it. Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 21:53:36 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:53:36 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men /What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152468 > >>SSSusan: > > I mean, would anyone dare suggest Snape is sexy here? Come on, > tell the truth! Would anyone?? And I don't mean Rickman!Snape > either. It *has* been done here before, you know, people talking > about Snape being sexy and why.... > Betsy Hp: < HUGE SNIP> Plus he's got that amazing wit he's so not afraid to use. (Sometimes when he shouldn't, I'll admit.) Alla: Hehe. I promise not to argue, just wanted to say that IF Snape was not afraid to use his wit on those who are higher than he is in the hierarchy, I would totally like that. Because usually I LOVE smart, sarcastic characters as long as their sarcasm is a weapon against those stronger than those characters or their peers at least. Have you noticed for example that in fanfiction stories Snape often snarks at Dumbledore and never does that in canon? Eh, never mind just wanted to say that. I guess Phoenixgod (I think) totally nailed I for me ? it depends on whether you sympathize more with those who receive the sarcasm or those who give it. > >>Alla: > > But funnily enough I was talking to somebody off list about > sexiness of the characters and I probably mentioned it on list in > the past, but I really do NOT find any of the adult characters > sexy. Honestly, I don't. > And I am not just talking about Snape, I am also talking about > Sirius, who I love dearly as a character, and whom I think would > have been a loyal friend after a lot of therapy sessions :) > I don't know why. I mean, Sirius IS describes as physically > attractive, but I guess not my type. > Betsy Hp: And I'm the opposite. I find so many of JKR's male characters to be quite attractive. I think, probably because of the hurt/comfort thing, if I'm being totally honest (to my inner-Pansy who's feelings would be hurt if I lied during a good girly dish like this ). Sirius and Lupin and Snape (of course) all strike me as yummy, even if I'm not always a big fan of their actions. They all suffer so well. Alla: Oh, TOTALLY hurt-comfort gets to me as well, and you ARE right all these characters suffer SO well (well, Snape needs to suffer more and more and more, if you ask me), BUT to me it is so, I don't know, platonic, if that even makes sense. What I am trying to say is that yes, I do have that desire to hug Sirius and to make it better and of course to mother Harry and to make it better for him, BUT when I think about Sirius and am about to go into daydreaming part, my imagination always gives me reality check of the sort. As in that Sirius is way too damaged to be a good husband or boyfriend. Does that make sense? I feel hurt-comfort about this character in the friendly way, if that is even possible. Betsy: The funny thing is that I *never* thought Lockhart was sexy. At all. Did anybody, I wonder? Because, while he was described as being physically attractive, his personality was off-putting from the start. Alla: Me too. Betsy: So yeah, when it comes to her male characters, JKR's got me. Alla: Totally. I think she got me on very many of her characters. > Betsy Hp: >> Have the books soured on me a bit? They have. At least, I'm not as > fond of the "good guys" as I used to be. I wouldn't want to hang > out with them, and quite a few I'd actively avoid. I still like > Harry, but his darkness has always been a part of his character, and > he seems to at least acknowledge when he goes too far. > Alla: Hehe. I think that books did not sour on me precisely because I AM so fond of good guys. The characters are the main reason why I am rereading the books over and over again. I DO want to hang out with them, of course with Harry first and foremost, but also with so many others and they are the main reason I would love to stop by in Potterverse for a visit, not for a permanent stay though. And, yes, what Geoff said about Harry's darkness, which in my book is not different from the usual "person". JMO, Alla From lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk Thu May 18 21:10:23 2006 From: lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk (Tara Tierney) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:10:23 -0000 Subject: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152469 > Brady: > > This is a welcome change :) > > BTW, if Harry cn't see clearly with his glasses, why are we assuming > that the person he saw was Aberforth and not DD himself?? Why would > Dung be fumbling with something if it was not fear of DD?? Harry > thought he recognises him as the barman, but the distance and the > rain on his glasses can definitly make DD look like the barman, can't > they? > > Just my tuppence. > Brady. > Lunasa: Maybe Dung is fumbling whatever he's holding in fear of Aberforth because he KNOWS Aberforth is Dumbledore's brother? Or wasn't Dung barred from the Hogshead? Perhaps he's fumbling in fear of Aberforth himself, maybe his barring was something more embarassing that was previously thought. And it would have to be something pretty embarassing or serious to get barred from a pub like the Hog's Head. Or maybe Aberforth is simply the angrier Dumbledore brother. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Thu May 18 22:26:00 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 22:26:00 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152470 Betsy Hp: > Okay, I'm about to channel my inner-Pansy here, unleash my simpering girly-girlness, and horrify JKR, but... Ceridwen: (pulling a chair up to the table and setting out the flavored creamer to go with the good dish coffee and kuchen) My inner Pansy is squeeing in delight! Betsy Hp: > Oh, my Lord, yes, yes, a thousand times yes! Snape is so very, incredibly, mind meltingly sexy, IMO. I am completely and totally positive that there is a strong and healthy Snape fanclub at Hogwarts. Probably tilted towards Slytherins, but with its fair share of Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs, and even a few rogue Gryffindors bravely defying their house's bias. Ceridwen: Snape is the only male teacher we know about who is young and dynamic, enough so that there have got to be young witches with huge crushes on him. House be damned, I would bet. And before anyone says anything about bias against Gryffindors, or from Gryffindors toward Slytherins - when I was in basic training, quite a few of the female troops had crushes on the drill sergeants. And Snapier people you will never find. Betsy Hp: > And no, it's not Rickman. (Though I do like Rickman, I think he was mis-cast in this role. He's too old, unfortunately... Ceridwen: Too old, yes, but his *voice*! Oy, I could die! But, I was intrigued by Snape and by the completely unknown future JKR had in mind for him before I saw the movies. The character was compelling from the minute he gave Harry the 'evil eye'. Betsy Hp: > But yeah, smart gets me every time, and Snape has smarts in buckets. Plus he's got that amazing wit he's so not afraid to use. (Sometimes when he shouldn't, I'll admit.) And to dredge up Sydney's Jogging!Snape, he's also in incredible shape (running from the dungeon to the top of the astronomy tower and then back down, still able to cower werewolves and fend off pissed off students...) and wonderfully skilled with his wand. (my inner-Pansy is giggling madly...) Ceridwen: I like wordplay, and I like it when people can dredge up thoughtful references. The mind certainly sways it for me! The wit goes along with wordplay, and he is a master wordsmith. Being in shape only makes it that much better. More eye-candy. *g* And, competent in his craft is certainly attractive. It's the whole 'can he support me' thing that is so not in vogue these days. Which, of course, brings us to the wand, which he seemingly disparages, but which he is a master at as well. My Pansy is holding hands with your Pansy and jumping up and down. Betsy Hp: > [O]ne of the things that is so interesting about Snape as a character is he's such a combination of male and female qualities. He's good with a wand and with a cauldron. Ceridwen: I never liked the sort of guy who concentrated only on his masculine side for fear of failing at being male. Snape doesn't have this problem. That just lends dignity to him, which unfortunately, Harry doesn't see. Maybe this dualness makes him a richer character. I think that if Snape was all about the Macho, he wouldn't be nearly as interesting nor as deep. And, speaking about Lockhart and the Chamber of Secrets, I was struck by the way Snape gripped the chair when he heard that Ginny had been taken. Female, absolutely. Or, male? Holding himself back so Lockhart could do what the DADA teacher is supposed to do in this sort of situation? In either event, it was a glaring show of emotion, which is also attractive (when not overdone, and this certainly wasn't). Betsy Hp: > And of course, JKR as a master of hurt/comfort with her guys, doesn't spare Snape. So there's that going for him, too. Ceridwen: Agreed. But another aspect of this is his apparent determination, sometimes wrongheaded in my opinion, of holding it all in. I would say stereotypically male, but I would then fear that people would miss the 'stereotypical'. I know both males and females who do this, and it lends an air of impending tragedy. *(snipping more things I completely agree with)* Betsy Hp: > The funny thing is that I *never* thought Lockhart was sexy. At all. Did anybody, I wonder? Because, while he was described as being physically attractive, his personality was off-putting from the start. Ceridwen: Same here. Lockhart is one of those guys you see with groupies gathered around him, and you just wonder why. Too pretty, too aware of it. Though he did seem to have some charisma to explain the wide fanbase. My Pansy is waiting for the others, with plenty of coffee brewing, or tea if you'd rather. Ceridwen. From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 18 22:26:50 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:26:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518222650.51830.qmail@web37208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152471 horridporrid03 wrote: So yeah, when it comes to her male characters, JKR's got me. Betsy Hp Catherine now: I'm still young enough (at least if we were still in the RW chronologically in-synch with the WW) that I know I would have had a *total* school-girl crush on Harry and probably more so Ron (have always melted for redheads! Though don't tell my blond husband!!) in fact, probably any of the Weasly boys would have caught my eye, although personality-wise I wouldn't have liked Percy or probably the twins....but I'm a little younger than Charlie, so I guess he or Bill would have been my fancy. As for the adults, with whom I can relate to now, totally hot for Sirius. Not too sure about Snape, he's certainly got the mystery aura about him, I'll give him that...and who wouldn't want to at least *try* to make that man happy? But he's a bit of a challenge, and I dated too many challenges to go for that type anymore. Granted, Sirius is a challenge too. I love the calmness about Lupin, but I think he's too passive for me, I'd probably pick fights with him just to get a rise out of him. Catherine __________________________________________________ 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 gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu May 18 23:27:34 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 23:27:34 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152472 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > > > I still like Harry, but his darkness has always been a part of > > > his character, and he seems to at least acknowledge when he goes > > > too far. > > > >>Geoff: > > I don't think that Harry possesses an exceptional darkness. > > Betsy Hp: > I agree. > > > >>Geoff: > > We ae seeing the "good" characters moving from na?ve little First > > Years for whom the Wizarding World is still a place of wonder into > > middle adolescence where their world view is widening and the > > blacks and whites of childhood become the greys of adulthood. > > > > Harry's darkness is no more than that of any teenager. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Again, I agree. Harry does bad things at times. He has from the > moment we met him (as a personality) in PS/SS. They weren't > horrible things, and if he was wrong, he'd feel guilt and struggle > with what he was feeling. > > Harry can, for example, lose his temper and lash out. I *like* that > about him, because it's very, very human. And it doesn't scare me > or turn me off because, usually, he recognizes when he's behaved > badly, and will either apologize (when it's a hurt Ron and Hermione) > or feel horrified (when it's near death Draco). So I see that Harry > is wrestling with these issues. And I like that. > > But with Hermione for example, she caused a classmate to walk around > with an apparently permanent brand on her face. And has it given > Hermione a moments pause? Not that we've seen. > > Of course, this could be the limitation of pov. We see Harry > struggle because we get a peek inside his head. But JKR could have > easily given us a scene where either Marietta walks by in her mask, > or Hermione is told that the brand is still there, and we at least > see Hermione pause or something. Anything to suggest that Hermione > is at least wrestling with her actions. > > Instead we get nothing and we're left to believe that Hermione is > just fine with disfiguring a classmate. Which turns me off of > Hermione. Suddenly, I really don't care for her anymore. > > > >>Geoff: > > I am glad that Harry is not squeaky clean, that he loses his > > temper, does thoughtless and uncaring things; it merely points him > > up as an average and normal member of fallen humanity. > > Betsy Hp: > Again, I absolutely agree. What bothers me is that some of > the "good characters" (not Harry) have done some disturbing things > and it doesn't seem to bother them. They haven't just gotten > muddy. They're rolling in it. Geoff: Thanks for that reply. I'm glad you have enlarged on your previous remark which may have been a throwaway line and I drew too much from it. I felt that you were specifically - and unfairly - targetting Harry. Like you, I am more distrustful of Hermione. I think that she has a vicious streak which emerges when she is being protective of those close to her and can also be extremely manipulative to gain her ends. Most certainly, I find her less endearing than Harry. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri May 19 00:05:38 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 00:05:38 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152473 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Carol wrote: > > Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, > > and immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of > > our own lives and social views? > > > SSSusan: > ...edited... > > Am I truly in a small minority of people who still really LIKES the > Potterverse? still guffaws at some of JKR's clever turns of phrase? > still marvels at her creativity? still shakes her head that this > writer can have us arguing after SIX books about whether a character > is evil, good, neither or both? > > Am I in a small minority of people who still actually LIKES Harry > himself? ::huffs on D'oH shield and glances at it sentimentally:: > > ...edited... > > Anybody else game? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > bboyminn: I've been trying to think for days how to respond to this, and haven't had much luck. Certainly, I like the jokes and the quirks, but what really makes me laugh out loud is recognising life. When I read something and I get that 'Oooh, I know just what you mean. Been there, done that.' feeling. Like when Harry walks over to Cho so they can go to Hogsmeade for Valentines day, and suddenly Harry has this complete 'body discontinuity' moment, where he feels his arms are swinging wildly, and his feet are suddenly too big. Boy do I know that feeling. Really, in some ways that's the appeal of the book to me, I see life in them, and I don't mean in the obvious ways typical of other authors. JKR capture the male mind with amazing clarity. She also understands the underlying motivations of girls. Further she captures the youthful frustration that brings a sense of how everything and everyone is unfair. It's one of the things I also like about 'Malcom in the Middle'. Malcom and his brothers will do the most outrageous things, and when there mother comes down on them, the first thing they scream is 'UNFAIR". Boy, do I know that feeling. So, yes, I get the joke, I see the comedy, but what really gets me are those 'everyday, every life' moments of self-recognition. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 23:59:42 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:59:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518235942.58959.qmail@web61314.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152474 Ceridwen wrote: Ceridwen: I like wordplay, and I like it when people can dredge up thoughtful references. The mind certainly sways it for me! The wit goes along with wordplay, and he is a master wordsmith. Being in shape only makes it that much better. More eye-candy. *g* And, competent in his craft is certainly attractive. It's the whole 'can he support me' thing that is so not in vogue these days. Which, of course, brings us to the wand, which he seemingly disparages, but which he is a master at as well. My Pansy is holding hands with your Pansy and jumping up and down. Joe: I was so going to stay a very long way away from this thread but I told my wife about it and she insisted that I put down that she "loved" Sirius and that Ron would be very, very nice in a few years. She also said and I quote "Snape revolts her in just about every way a person can be revolted. Since I am here I do have a question. What exactly would make someone think that Snape is in shape? Wizards in general seem to use magic for almost every type of labor and the only sport they ever seem to play is Quidditch. Unless you use magic somehow you have to have regular exercise to be in shape. We don't ever see any of the adults and few of the students ever do anything to get or stay in shape. Unless it's magic is doesn't make sense. Unless I missed a book reference. I am going to assume and I could be totally wrong that there is some scene where Snape or maybe even someone else covers a bit of distance at some point. If this is the case it doesn't mean anything. I know several people who run 10Ks regularly who are in terrible shape and fairly overweight. Joe From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 00:48:52 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 00:48:52 -0000 Subject: Snape's barbed words (Was: Sexy Snape / JKR's men /What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152475 > Betsy Hp: > < HUGE SNIP> > Plus he's got that amazing wit he's so not afraid to use. > (Sometimes when he shouldn't, I'll admit.) > > > Alla: > > Hehe. I promise not to argue, just wanted to say that IF Snape was > not afraid to use his wit on those who are higher than he is in the > hierarchy, I would totally like that. Because usually I LOVE smart, > sarcastic characters as long as their sarcasm is a weapon against > those stronger than those characters or their peers at least. Carol responds: Hi, Alla. Let me quickly mention that, like you and Betsy, I never found Lockhart attractive, so we agree there. But (surprise), I'm with Betsy in finding Snape's sarcastic wit attractive (with the notable exception of "I see no difference," for which, unfortunately, I can find no defense). But, speaking of superiors and equals, I don't think that Snape wants to appear sarcastic to Dumbledore. Assuming that he's DDM (or, if you like, wants to appear to be DDM), they are working together in a very serious cause for which Snape is risking his life and sarcasm is simply inappropriate. He will, on occasion, argue with Dumbledore, but he won't push too far, and he doesn't resort to sarcasm AFAWK. With his peers, however, it's another matter. He wins hands down over Peter Pettigrew in "Spinner's End," with PP scuttling upstairs with his tail (figuratively) between his legs. Snape gets in some pretty good digs at Bellatrix, too, my favorite being, "Yes, indeed, most admirable. Of course, you weren't a lot of use to him in prison, but the gesture was undoubtedly fine" (HBP Am. ed. 27). He's hitting Bellatrix where she's most vulnerable, her loyalty to Voldemort, and doing a pretty good job of getting to her, I'd say. Or, if you prefer the use of sarcasm with his colleagues, there's his treatment of Lockhart in CoS (which is later taken up by the other teachers, including McGonagall): "Just the man. The very man. A girl has been snatched by the monster, Lockhart. Taken into the Chamber of Secrets itself. Your moment has come at last." And "I certainly remember you saying you were sorry you hadn't had a crack at the monster before Hagrid was arrested. Didn't you say that the whole affair had been bungled, and that you should have been given free rein from the first?" (CoS Am. ed. 294). Snape is publicly exposing Lockhart's ineptitude and pretense by repeating his own words back to him. "The very man," indeed. Or how about taking on a "superior" whose authority, unlike Dumbledore's, he does *not* respect--Delores Umbrage? He claims (after having given her fake Veritaserum earlier) to have none left: "You took my last bottle to interrogate Potter. Surely you did not use it all? I told you that three drops would be sufficient . . . . Unless you wish to poison Potter . . . I cannot help you. The only trouble is that most venoms act too fast to give the victim much time for truth telling" (OoP Am. ed. 745). Umbridge recognizes this cool bit of equivocating as a ploy, screaming that he's being deliberately unhelpful and is on probation. Rather than showing fear or concern, Snape gives her "an ironic bow" and starts to leave the office but hesitates as Harry shouts his cryptic message about Padfoot being "in the place where it's hidden." We once again see Snape's "inscrutable expression" as Harry tries to will Snape to read his mind (successfully, I would guess, based on HBP, but that's not relevant here). Rather than answering Umbrage's demand to know what Harry is talking about, Snape says coldly, "Potter, when I want nonsense shouted at me I shall give you a Babbling Beverage. And Crabbe, loosen your hold a little, if Longbottom suffocates it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork, and I am afraid I shall have to mention it on your reference if you ever apply for a job" (746). Under cover of insulting Harry and protecting Crabbe's future as a job applicant, he defies Umbrage and saves Neville from suffocation. I would say that his words in this scene qualify as a smart, sarcastic character using his wit against someone higher than he is in the hierarchy, for whom he feels no fear and a great deal of contempt, he does for Lockhart, Bellatrix, and Pettigrew as well. (I also take these scenes as clear evidence that Snape is DDM, but let's ignore the loyalties and just look at the use of words as weapons.) Carol, who finds Snape's wit and intelligence sexy but primarily admires his (apparent) willingness to risk his life to serve Dumbledore's cause against his own natural instincts From rhiannon902002 at yahoo.com Thu May 18 17:54:44 2006 From: rhiannon902002 at yahoo.com (Barton Rhiannon) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 10:54:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Book Seven plot Re: Request for new topics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518175444.56814.qmail@web54408.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152476 In the seventh book, who do you think will die besides Voldemort? Rhiannon Decker From glykonix at yahoo.com Thu May 18 21:49:22 2006 From: glykonix at yahoo.com (Adriana) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:49:22 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152477 > > Lupinlore: > > I think this is absolutely and totally irrelevent. Nothing that > > was done to Snape, by omission or commission, in any way excuses > > his abuse of Harry and Neville or IN ANY WAY releases him from > > punishment for that reprehensible abuse. Nor does it in any way > > lessen Dumbledore's fault in allowing the abuse to take place and > > continue. Glykonix: The strict, sarcastic teachers such as Snape absolutely hate 2 types of students, the weak, such as Neville, and the ones that answer back, rudely something Harry does all to often. From his first class we see Harry answering back to Snape. Now it's true that Snape had singled him out, and was humiliating him. But I'm not even sure that was Snape's plan. Harry could have known at least one answer, he was given 3 chances after all. We of course know that Harry had no way of knowing anything, but I'm not to sure Snape was aware of the way in which the Durseleys had treated him if the Occlumency lessons are to go by. After all we hear from Slughorn throughout the whole 6th book about how Lily was brilliant at potions, and we know that Snape used his own mothers potion book while in school, it wouldn't have been implausible for her Harry to have looked through his mothers books. So it's not to far fetched to assume that Snape might have actually expected Harry to know some of the answers and wasn't just trying to humiliate him from the first day. I'll bet the answers to those questions were somewhere in the first pages of the book, because they're clearly not things used by first years, but they're just the right thing to be included in an introduction to the study of potion making, because they make such great examples of why potions are so 'cool'. I'm not saying it was alright, the way in which he gave harry 0's even though his potions were sometimes better then others, but I've seen this done in class by some of my teachers as well. Our chemistry teacher just a few days ago, didn't allow one of the girls to hand in her essay because she had entered class just a few moments after the teacher did. And the teacher was early. As for his treatment of Neville, well I've seen the above mentioned chemistry teacher try to calm a girl who was crying because she had just received a 3 by shouting at her, not the best method I can assure you. So taking all this in count, I can hardly see Snape as the abuser some try to make him look like. He's a strict teacher, who tells his students from the start that he will not be lenient on them. The simple fact that he takes only O's students proves that he does his job well, since there are enough students to form a class. As for the favoritism, it's not nice, but I rather prefer his type of favoritism to Slughorn's. You want to accuse somebody of abuse stick to Umbridge, she really got a kick out of what she was doing. I'm not even going to start on Black and Lupin and all that because then I won't stop. Suffice is to say that on that night in the Shrieking Shack, Sirius Black had a lot of fun banging Snape's head against the ceiling of that corridor, while Snape took care and conjured stretchers for everybody to get them to the castle, Black included. Glykonix From zgirnius at yahoo.com Fri May 19 01:29:04 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 01:29:04 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152478 zgirnius: Fun, BetsyHP. My inner Pansy is having a night out! Ceridwen: >My Pansy is waiting for the others, with plenty of coffee brewing, or tea if you'd rather. Zgirnius: Actually that cake you mentioned sounded great Betsy Hp: >The funny thing is that I *never* thought Lockhart was sexy. At all. Did anybody, I wonder? Because, while he was described as being physically attractive, his personality was off-putting from the start. And JKR didn't give us anything to work with. I wonder how he'd have come across if the books were written from Hermione's pov? Hermione *must* have interperted Lockhart's actions completely differently from Harry for her to keep her crush for so long. Would that have passed on to us as readers, I wonder? (I suspect JKR would have still left him exposed as a fraud from the get-go, with the reader feeling a sort of fond sympathy for Hermione's crush.) zgirnius: No, not sexy. Just fabulous. I can't think of a better walking, talking caricature I have read anywhere. However, this in no way prevented me from having a fond sympathy for Hermione's crush. (Fine description of how I felt about it). Because, it's HERMIONE. And Lockhart is a TEACHER. He can't POSSIBLY be a total twit. Oh no, the boys must just be jealous Alla: > Hehe. I promise not to argue, just wanted to say that IF Snape was not afraid to use his wit on those who are higher than he is in the hierarchy, I would totally like that. Zgirnius: Serves me right for waiting to post later, I was going to go into the Umbridge scene, but Carol has already said it better. Joe: > I am going to assume and I could be totally wrong that there is some scene where Snape or maybe even someone else covers a bit of distance at some point. If this is the case it doesn't mean anything. I know several people who run 10Ks regularly who are in terrible shape and fairly overweight. Zgirnius: We cannot of course be sure of his level of aerobic fitness, but canon describes him as on the thin side. A male in his late thirties, of below average weight for his height, is at least going to LOOK fit. Add to that his impressive energy level (all this stalking about at night, grading of long essay assignments, and extracurricular activity, and the guy never seems TIRED), and I would guess he is in at least decent shape. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 01:53:28 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 01:53:28 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152479 Carol earlier: > Without going into detail here, I think there *is* something sexy about Snape, certainly something compelling for certain female readers (not all, obviously!). Clearly Narcissa--proud, rich, beautiful, pureblood Narcissa--doesn't consider him repellant in HBP, shedding tears on his chest, putting her face close to hers, seizing her hand in both of his and kissing it. Carol again: Sorry, List Elves, but I had to correct myself here. That should be "Clearly Narcissa--proud, rich, beautiful, pureblood Narcissa--doesn't consider him repellant in HBP, shedding tears on his chest, putting her face close to *his*, seizing *his* hand in both of *hers* and kissing it." Sheesh. I do understand the concept of gender in English pronouns and the difference between the male and female sexes. The concept of not going into detail, however, needs a little work. Carol, glad that Snape and Narcissa are fictional characters who can't read her post From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Thu May 18 22:21:25 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: My Theories In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060518222125.64915.qmail@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152480 WHO IS RAB?: I think its Regulus Black. Remember in Book #5 that no one that was helping in the cleaning of 12 Grimmauld Place could open a locket so they threw it in bag of rubbage. So this raises some questions: - How did Regulus find out? And did he tell anyone of his family members - If it is the missing locket, what happened to that bag it was put in? Will Harry find it in Book #7 - Did Regulus document his findings - Did Kreacher take it from the bag (since he was taking everything else)? Did he give it to Bellatrix or Draco's family? I think that 12 Grimmauld Place and Kreacher will have something important to do with #7 because why would Rowling have put it in there. I think Kreacher knows something about Horcruxes. Did Regulus take Kreacher with him since the mission requires two beings? Life Debt: In Book #3 DD tells Harry that Wormtail will be forever in his debt because Harry spared his life. We all know that James saved Snape's life back in their school days. Would this life-debt be carried on to family once the saver's life has ended?? So would this mean that LV has two servants that are now in the debt of Harry Potter? Is Petunia a squib? I look back at all the books and I think Petunia or the Evans family may have had wizardry in it before Lily. She has some similarities, attitude wise, to Argus Filch, the janitor. She seems so bitter towards the wizards because her parents were so proud of Lily getting her letter. If most Muggles don't even know about the Wizards why would the parents be proud? If Petunia is a squib can she what her husband can't and does that make Dudley special too? Dumbledore seemed interested in the well-being of Dudley. And of course my Dumbledore isn't dead theory: Looking back I don't think Dumbledore is dead. - Back in Book #1 when Harry first meets Snape, Snape says in his speech how he can teach them to "put a stopper on death". Would this be able to stop a killing curse? If it can, did he make some for Dumbledore or did Dumbledore know about this potion and have Slug make it for him? - In Book #6, Dumbledore says "Snape, please". Most thought this too be a plead for life, but why would a wizard as powerful and old as Dumbledore plead for life. I believe he was telling him to go through with their secret plan, plus to make it look convincing to the other Death Eaters. And with that, the Killing Curse in other books kills the victim and drops them in their place, but this time it knocked Dumbledore over the side of the tower. Why would it now knock someone about? I think the potion mixed with the potion may have put Dumbledore in a comma of some sort. At the bottom of the tower Dumbledore looked peaceful, smiling almost. In other books the victims kept the face that they died with. Again, I think Dumbledore was just "sleeping". - At Dumbledore's funeral you never see the body. After Hagrid places the body on the table and it is engulfed by the tomb you see a phoenix go into the sky. Remember this. Now going to another fact. We know that Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher in his time. McGonnogal (sp?) is now the transfiguration teacher and is an animagus. Is Dumbledore an animagus? Since Fawkes is his "mate"/"pet" is Dumbledore's animagus form the phoenix? It would make sense since at the funeral the body then erupted into flames before being encased in marble. Remember back in book #4 Hermione looks up all the registered animgus's in the world, would she have seen Dumbledore on their? Would she still remember? Now if Dumbledore was a Phoenix animagus and say he did die could he come back to life? - Now I know Dumbledore was a kind, forgiving man, but he wasn't stupid. I think he knew that once LV was back that Snape would have to go back to him. I think that Dumbledore struck up a plan with Snape. Remember when Snape was teaching Harry Occlumens that he said only a strong Occlumens like him could block LV from getting inside their mind. So I think that Snape felt safe keeping secrets from LV. - Did Dumbledore know more about the future? Did he use Trelawney to see into the future? She never remembers these things and he had her at Hogwarts all the time. - Why doesn't Fawkes ever come to Dumbledore's aid? In all other books Fawkes helps those that are friends of Dumbledore and Dumbledore himself, so why wouldn't the bird help his master now? Unless Dumbledore told him not to because he wasn't in real danger! - Here's the biggest question though: WHERE'S DUMBLEDORE'S WAND?? Remember when Aragorn died and Slug sang that sad song. At the end of the verses they say they broke his wand in half. If this is the custom of wizards then why didn't they snap Dumbledore's? It went over the wall with him. That's all I can type for now. I got more though. Mathias From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri May 19 02:16:59 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 02:16:59 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: <20060518235942.58959.qmail@web61314.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152481 Joe: > I was so going to stay a very long way away from this thread but I told my wife about it and she insisted that I put down that she "loved" Sirius and that Ron would be very, very nice in a few years. She also said and I quote "Snape revolts her in just about every way a person can be revolted. Ceridwen: This is my fourth post and the iron is heating as I type, but I couldn't resist welcoming Mrs. Joe's inner Pansy to the discussion! I agree with her about Ron. He's awkward and sometimes a little stupid about girls now, but he may have the makings of a good man if he can get away from some of the attitudes against females the twins have displayed in the past. With help from Harry and Hermione, and his own inner compass, I think he'll turn out. I wasn't too crazy about Sirius in the sexy vein. The Pensieve scene shows him being just a little too aware of his looks for my taste, the same objection I have to Lockhart. But, Lockhart was far more self-centered and aware of himself than Sirius, and in the end, far more dangerous through his deceptions. Sirius had the redeeming quality of intense loyalty to his friends, and he truly cared about Harry. Joe: > Since I am here I do have a question. What exactly would make someone think that Snape is in shape? Wizards in general seem to use magic for almost every type of labor and the only sport they ever seem to play is Quidditch. Ceridwen: I think we're all assuming some level of fitness for Snape, and anyone else who works at Hogwarts, due to all the stairs. Snape patrols the hallways after curfew, which is nine levels that I can think of, the dungeons and the ground floor which has no number in the British way of numbering floors, being the eighth and ninth. Even with the shortcuts and passageways, that's a lot of ground to cover between lights out and whenever they stop patrolling! When I was in the Army, we did stairs at times during our PT. It was strenuous, and built up good thigh muscles. Same for running hills. Which, come to think of it, would make Filch somewhat fit as well. ...'Nuff said on that! It was nice to meet your wife's inner Pansy. I hope she enjoyed the kuchen and coffee! Ceridwen. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 19 02:48:31 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 02:48:31 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152482 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: characterization is one of JKR's skills. Most of > her characters are memorable and consistent. Snape, love him or hate him, is "a gift of a character" that most of us won't soon forget. Ron and Hermione, despite their flaws, are very human and recognizable characters. Neville is just lovable, and his growth from the first book to the fifth (we don't see much of him in the sixth) is admirable. (snip)> > I can't speak for anyone else, but if I come back after the seventh > book, satisfied that she's given a plausible explanation for Snape and has not violated what I consider to be the moral integrity of her > world by having Harry kill Voldemort with an Unforgiveable Curse, it will be to return to the company of people I love, despite all the > faults and frailities that make them so real, to laugh and cry with > them, to share their world, which for all its violence and prejudice and inadequate lighting, is in many ways a more interesting place than the mundane world I live in, with its unpaid bills and computer problems and irascible, demanding, semiliterate clients. > > I think that's the answer, really. I love the world that JKR created, and like Harry, I'd rather be at Hogwarts than at Privet Drive. It's a magical world, and when I read the books or think about the characters, I believe in it and them, "the willing suspension of disbelief that constitues poetic faith." > Tonks: I agree that JKR has made the world and the people in it so very real. I love them, most of them. As to sexy Snape: I have always been in love with DD. But after seeing movie Snape I have that image of Snape now when I read the books. So I lust after Snape, but still my heart belongs to DD. My friends told me from the beginning that DD was too old for me, and occasionally they remind me that he is a fictional character. Now that the books are darker they are not as much fun as in the beginning. And we are now more aware of the problems of the WW world. I liked the world better in the first couple of books. There has always been a longing in my heart to be there, but now that DD is gone, maybe not so much. I longed to be with DD and Hagrid, and Molly who I would hope would be a very good friend. Luna reminds me of someone I once knew. We need a few Luna's in the world, to keep it fun. I would even like the ugly Snape of the books, maybe. I would respect his sarcastic dark humor. I love the mysterious, mystical type of world outside of what the ordinary Muggle can see or care about. I love that "otherness" about the place. I like the idea of having powers over the natural world and over myself that Muggles don't have. I never thought about the conveniences that the Muggle world has to offer that I would miss in the WW. So now that I have thought about it, it would be nice to live in the Muggle world, but secretly be a Witch/Wizard. I haven't really thought about it until now. But it does seem that as the books are getting more and more like the evils of our own world, it doesn't matter which world you live in "life is hell and then you die". But like Luna, if I were in the WW, I think it would be like having friends. People there don't seem to move as much as Muggles do, so friends stay with you, there is community. I would like that. I know that it is crazy to say this, but it is like something died in me when DD died. It was as if, as long as DD was alive and well at Hogwarts, all was well in the world. I wonder if the WW will even survive after book 7. But like Carol I will probably go back time to time and vist my old friends, and maybe take them some chocolate frogs too. Tonks_op From estesrandy at yahoo.com Fri May 19 02:48:42 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 02:48:42 -0000 Subject: 7 horcruxes = 7 deadly sins? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152483 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > The number seven has an interesting metaphysical and religious history > I think. And considering how Voldemort is pure evil and maybe since I > just recently watched the movie Seven, do you think the seven deadly > sins are embedded in the horcruxes some how? Like perhaps each horcrux > represents a deadly sin or perhaps the actual owner had been afflicted > by them, or maybe perhaps a deadly sin was afflicting Voldemort at the > time of creating the horcrux? Depending on who is afflicted with the > sin, ie Voldie or his victims, this could help leading us into > figuring out what they are. > Just a thought.. > > Najwa > I pondered this back in February too. I think that the horcruxes do represent the behaviors that Harry (and every good Knight or Hero) must overcome. In my opinion the horcruxes are symbols. The Locket is a symbol of Lust( held onto by Merope who lusted after Tom Riddle Sr.) The Ring is a symbol of Pride(held onto by Marvolo who felt pride in his relation to Slytherin) The Diary is a symbol of Envy( created by Tom Riddle Jr. to show his connection with Slytherin for all future generations to learn) He envied the powers of Sal Slytherin) The Hufflepuff Cup is a symbol of Gluttony (held onto by Hepzibah Smith who kept many items that she never used and did not need) Something unknown is a symbol of Sloth Something unknown is a symbol of Anger Something unknown is a symbol of Greed By the way look at the new teachers in the books. Quirrell is filled of Pride and thinks other's cannot stop his efforts to aquire the stone especially not a boy. Pride is like an evil voice in the back of your head. Harry learns Humility when Dumbledore tells him that a man who can see himself as he truly is in the mirror of Erised will be very happy. Lockhart is filled with Envy because he steals the accomplishments of others. Lupin is a slothful character who is slow to act. His guilt about being a werewolf causes him to be self-absorbed and slow to act. However he does teach Harry to overcome his fears and take action. By the way, sloth is associated with wasting precious time. IF you only had a time turner, you can go back and take proper action! Moody has the Mad Eye of Lust. The student's are learning about the influence of the opposite sex on their behaviors. Look at what Strong Durmstrang men and Beautiful Beaux Baton Women represent. Moddy presses Harry to channel his inner Goblet of Fire to acheive athletic greatness and win the cup. Umbridge is a symbol of Anger. To take umbrage is to take offence of the behaviors of others because you feel you have been slighted. This is the feeling of the Centaurs towards Umbridge when she makes rude comments. She does teach Harry patience and restraint which is the way to overcome Anger. Slughorn is a glutton. He drinks a little too much, and likes his candy. He disguises himself as an easy chair. He likes to surround himself with lots of other important people (another form of gluttony). Perhaps that is why he teaches Gulp-a-lot's Law! Harry learns to only take a small sip of Felix and not be a glutton. Perhaps Dumbledore drank a little too much from that bowl. I do not know who represents Greed, since I have rethought the meaning of HBP. Last time I brought this stuff up, others told me that I had no evidence. The coincidences are interesting to me. Randy From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 01:34:54 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:34:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060519013454.12934.qmail@web61318.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152484 zgirnius wrote: We cannot of course be sure of his level of aerobic fitness, but canon describes him as on the thin side. A male in his late thirties, of below average weight for his height, is at least going to LOOK fit. Add to that his impressive energy level (all this stalking about at night, grading of long essay assignments, and extracurricular activity, and the guy never seems TIRED), and I would guess he is in at least decent shape. Joe: I can see him being skinny. Late nights, no exercise that we know of and his sallow skin and bad hair. All lead me more to believe that he gets little exercise, little exposure to the sun and doesn't eat right either. Skinny to slender seems fairly canon based but in good shape seems to be more of a fanfiction thing IMO. Of course as I said before he isn't the only wizard who is out of shape. Joe From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 19 04:10:44 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 04:10:44 -0000 Subject: Why DD trust Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152486 I am beginning to wonder if the reason that DD trust SS is that Snape's parents are in hiding at Hogwarts. Heck everyone else is!! And DD would have told no one else. LV would think that Snape's parents are dead. Snape would only be a double agent if his parents were either really dead or cared for and protected very well. Otherwise there would be a serious risk for them as well. Many here have said that Madam Pinch is really Prince, Snape's mother. I wonder if Filch is his Muggle father. We think he is a squib, but maybe he is just a nasty Muggle in disguise. Do we know how long either of them have been at Hogwarts? Even if Filch isn't Snape Sr. I am pretty sure after HBP that Pinch is his mother. We see Filch and Pinch together a lot in HBP. We see Pinch get upset over seeing Harry with the potions book. It could just be a protective librarian, or something else. Tonks_op From puduhepa98 at aol.com Fri May 19 04:19:34 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 00:19:34 EDT Subject: Merope and Tom Sr. Message-ID: <435.16a3940.319ea156@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152487 > > > Julie: > Tom perhaps had no legal > > responsibility to do so, given that the marriage and the child's > > conception were founded on deceit, but morally it would have been > the > > right thing to do. > > Magpie: > Yes, morally it would have been right for him to provide for the > child. Morally it would also have been right for her to care for > the child. Neither of them seemed to care much about the child. > > -m >Pippin >Many modern jurisdictions allow annulment if it can be proved that one of the >parties was mentally incompetent at the time of the marriage for example >as a result of drugs or alcohol. I am not sure what the law in England is or >was in the 1920's but unless and until the marriage was legally annulled >Tom would be obliged to support his wife and child. Claiming that he >was hoodwinked would not be enough -- he would have had to *prove* >it. In any case he would be responsible for supporting the child -- >>annulment does not make a child illegitimate. Nikkalmati: I am certain TomSr. would have been legally responsible for the care and upbringing of his child. I would assume Merope in an attempt to keep him with her would have told him she was pregnant. In that case, he has a moral obligation to care for the child at least financially. He apparently did not make any effort to ensure the safety of the innocent baby. (He presumably did not even tell his parents they had a grandchild). She could have sued for support, but she died and no one knew who the father was. JKR must want us to see that LV was let down by his father as well as his mother. I cannot conceive that Merope was in any way at fault for dying. I am sure that she did not want to do it, but, like Tonks, she was harmed by rejection. I don't think she had any magic left and tried to do the best for Tom Jr. by finding the orphanage. Nikkalmati ( who won't touch the rest of the discussion with a 10 foot pole) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 19 04:58:01 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 04:58:01 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152488 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: >> > My Pansy is waiting for the others, with plenty of coffee brewing, or tea if you'd rather. > Tonks: Tea please. Yes let's talk about Snape and sex appeal. I know that in the books and in the pictures associated with the books Snape is not good looking. But let's assume Richman's looks.. And he is NOT too old. Just right I would say. I like the way that he takes command of the situation. He is intelligent, a man of honor, with a wicked sense of humor which I just love. Other Death Eaters fear him. He would be someone who could protect his lady, me thinketh. And I like the thought of being able to control the Potion's Master! (X Rated thought there. takes another sip of tea and blushes.) He has that romantic tragic tone to his being. I love the all black look with flowing capes too. And as Betsy says he is good with a wand and a cauldron. A man who can cook and with a whip of a wand clean up too. What more could you ask for?? (oh, Severus, please.) Tonks_op (blushing.) From puduhepa98 at aol.com Fri May 19 06:00:16 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 02:00:16 EDT Subject: Draco's Plot Message-ID: <48d.8e9fe.319eb8f0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152489 > > Betsy Hp: > ... The moment Voldemort starts going all out, he cooks up a > plan to kill Dumbledore, and Snape is the assassin. Draco is a > distraction and a nicely cruel way to punish a naughty Death Eater. > > Betsy Hp: > I agree with Magpie, there doesn't seem to be any point to getting > the Death Eaters into Hogwarts except as backup for Draco. ... > > >bboyminn: >I think you are likely right, Draco was merely a distraction, but >Draco getting DE's into the castle is important and critical. Further >once in the Castle, Draco become irrelavant, Snape or other DE's can >attempt to kill Dumbledore. >As to why Snape hasn't killed Dumbledore in the past, that was not his job. >It seems unreasonable for Voldemort to truly expect Draco to be able >to kill Dumbledore when far better wizards than he have failed. So, >maybe now is the time to force Snape to act. Snape says as much, >saying that he suspects Voldemort expects Snape to do 'it' in the end. >With Dumbledore out of the way, Snape is more valuable as a DE than as >a Spy. In other words, Voldemort is confident enough of his position >that he can afford to lose Snape-the Spy, and gain Snape-the General. Nikkalmati: I have not yet decided either way regarding which came first the chicken or the egg (the order to kill DD or the Cabinets). Both theories appear possible. However, I am somewhat confused about SS' role here. SS, you both assume, knows that Draco was ordered to kill DD. I guess we all agree that Draco is unlikely to succeed and DD's death is the result of his own severe weakness at the exact moment his life is threatened on the Tower. ( In fact, one reason SS was not ordered to kill DD previously IMO is that even SS was unlikely to succeed.) SS tells NM and BB that he thinks LV intends him to do "it" in the end. The reader knows "it" is DD's demise. Yet LV apparently has not told SS directly to do it himself, if needed. SS is pretty much left in the dark by LV and DM. He doesn't know when this is supposed to happen and his attempts to pump DM (i.e. Slughorn's party) tell us SS doesn't know DM's plan. I don't think LV expects his minions to guess at what he wants or to take much initiative. How then is SS supposed to step up and take DM's place if needed? What if he had not even been in the castle that night? We can speculate that LV has lost faith in SS, but even he can't exactly expect SS to carry out a plan he knows nothing about. How can it be a test, if SS has not been told what to do? If LV figures DD's death is worth losing SS as a spy, he would have to tell SS that. Also, no one knew DD would be in such bad shape that night, so did LV expect SS to be able to take on DD or did he think SS and 5 DE's would be enough? Wasn't it in OTP that DD knocked out all the Aurors in his office without breaking a sweat? Did LV even know what DM was planning? Maybe BB and DM cooked up the Cabinet plan themselves. In that case LV was sitting back not aware of the plan, just waiting for DM to fail- in which case LV would kill him or (even better) DD would be forced to kill DM, causing even more havoc. Any orders for SS to kill DD would be given later after DM was dead. Any thoughts? Nikkalmati ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get to your groups with one click. Know instantly when new email arrives _Click Here!_ (http://us.click.yahoo.com/.7bhrC/MGxNAA/yQLSAA/s4wxlB/TM) --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Wondering what to do this summer? Go to Patronus 2006 (http://www.patronus.dk/2006) or, if you're already registered for Lumos (http://www.hp2006.org), meet up with other HPfGU members there! 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_R EAD Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ellecain at yahoo.com.au Fri May 19 09:29:22 2006 From: ellecain at yahoo.com.au (ellecain) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 09:29:22 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152490 > > Betsy Hp: > > Okay, I'm about to channel my inner-Pansy here, unleash my > simpering > girly-girlness, and horrify JKR, but... > > Ceridwen: > (pulling a chair up to the table and setting out the flavored creamer > to go with the good dish coffee and kuchen) > My inner Pansy is squeeing in delight! Elyse: Oh can I join? Glad to crawl out of the woodwork for the Snape fangirling.... I'm totally with Betsy on the "Oh yes" part. The reasons for it? I dunno...I used to think it was just Hurt Comfort, which got very strong after HBP (considering DDM of course), but I dont think its just that. I think it begins with the dressing in black, and swooshing around in the cloak, the presence etc.. I realise that all the so called antiheroes and most of the traditional Victorian heroes have had the same qualities. I read in a book somewhere that they had in common: "an air of mystery, an edge of cruelty and they were all emotionally retarded". We did this Sexy Snape thread a while back as well, and someone (Catlady?) said that this was very representive of women who were drawn to power or powerful men. You know, the sort of cruel controlling dominant personality that many fictional heroes share and Snaoe shows signs of....I suppose thats where the skill level and competence and power play a part. After all he scares most people in the series. Oh yeah, and then theres the whole fun of liking the "bad boy". Coz thats what Snape is in JKR's world. The good guy (presumably) who doesnt act good. I think it was Elkins who said that Snape was the real rebel in the HP series. That he was the only proof we had that the existentialist ethos that Dumbledore proclaimed was actually *true*. So I suppose thers a certain excitement in finding Snape attractive in the teeth of the world... And lastly, theres no getting around the fact that he gets all the best lines in the book. Yeah the sarcasm is often cruel, but its very funny at times, especially in PoA where hes interrogating Harry about his Hogsmeade visits..theres a lot of dry humour there. So the sort of women who really go for the intelligent lines and wit, the personality is dead impressive. So yeah, Snape is Ever So Sexy. No doubt about it. But I find the reasons for it more interesting than anything else. And its not because of Rickman, or fanfiction. I prefer Canon Snape anytime over Movie or Fanon Snape. Not sure if I contributed to the discussion, but my inner Pansy had a hell of a good time. *g* Thanks for the tea, Ceridwen... Elyse From h.m.s at mweb.co.za Fri May 19 10:25:43 2006 From: h.m.s at mweb.co.za (H.M.S) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 12:25:43 +0200 Subject: My favorite moments: Message-ID: <006d01c67b2e$c902bdf0$25d117c4@Sharon> No: HPFGUIDX 152491 Kim: >I like this thread! Many of my favourite moments are not quite moments, but more like threads in themselves; like when Dumbledore collects Harry from the Dursley's (LOVED that whole scene and don't care about how wrong or right Dumbledore was to whack them on the head with their mead glasses - so there!) and says to Harry that he is not worried because Harry is with him. When this is followed later by DD saying he is not worried because he is with Harry - WELL! to me this summarises the whole story - from Harry being at first the follower who needs to be guided and protected, to Harry being the leader who guides and protects. Sharon Maggott From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri May 19 11:22:38 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 11:22:38 -0000 Subject: 7 horcruxes = 7 deadly sins? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152492 Randy: > > Lockhart is filled with Envy because he steals the accomplishments > of others. > > I do not know who represents Greed, since I have rethought the > meaning of HBP. Potioncat; Very nice post. I'm short on time, so I can only comment on the "new teacher" part. I agree Slughorn would be gluttony. But, if you were looking at DADA teachers instead of new teachers, I would suggest Snape for envy and Lockhart for greed. Snape does seem to envy the fame or recognition that certain others have. Lockhart could have been almost as successful if he had written the books more honestly, but he wanted all the glory and all the money. BTW, does anyone have the post number for a very old thread about the 7 books being based on the 7 defenses around the stone in SS/PS? I know, I've asked for it before, but I can't find it if I did store it away. According to that idea, HBP would have had potions as a major component. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri May 19 11:53:01 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 11:53:01 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152493 "Tonks" wrote: > Many here have said that Madam Pinch is really Prince, Snape's mother. > I wonder if Filch is his Muggle father. We think he is a squib, but > maybe he is just a nasty Muggle in disguise. Potioncat: In HBP Hermione calls Filch a wizard. That surprised me. We are sure, aren't we, that he's a Squib? Doesn't it seem harsh to have this man scrubbing away at frog guts and mud when someone else could just wave a wand? Based on the way Snape treats Filch, I don't think Filch is Snape's father or step-father. And I think it would gall Snape no end, to have his father serve as a janitor at the school where Snape was a master. He might not mind that his father had to work hard, but he wouldn't want him as part of the staff. > > Tonks: We see Pinch get upset > over seeing Harry with the potions book. It could just be a protective > librarian, or something else. Potioncat: Harry and Hermione hear a noise and a moment later Pince comes out. She gets upset about the book and grabs it. Much later in HBP we learn that Draco was in the library listening to H&H, and it must have been this same time because of what he says he heard. (based on what he tells DD on the tower.) So, I think in this chapter, Pince is really polyjuiced Draco. Draco knows Harry is doing so well in Potions because of the book and Draco wants it too. He's overheard Hermione talking about the spells that Harry's found in it. HBP is really very interesting. We're set up to know that DEs may be impersonating others. And now we have DD-is-Snape, Snape-is-DD, Pince- is-Eileen, Filch-is-Tobias, Pince-is-Draco, Slughorn-is-Snape, Tonks-is- Narcissa... From ellecain at yahoo.com.au Fri May 19 13:15:33 2006 From: ellecain at yahoo.com.au (ellecain) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 13:15:33 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152494 SSSusan: > But more to the point, I suppose, in listening to some folks talking > about HP and the online forums, it struck me that a lot of people > don't seem to write about the FUN they find in the books, the JOY of > Harry Potter or JKR's world. > > How 'bout we -- without succumbing to a series of just one-liners - - > talk about what we LOVE about the books? what we find FUN about > them, even after all this time? Elyse: Oh I still love HP, although I feel I like it a lot less than I did before I got involved in the fandom. I used to think that JKR's wizrding world was amazing, I liked it for its detail, I liked the idea of what Nora once called a "wainscot universe" and I wanted to go live in it, just for a while, a little holiday. But since I got involved in the fandom and the overheated discussions about the flaws of the WW, I dont think I would like to go there any more. I like the Muggle world much better. But I still love reading the books, especially JKR's details and turns of phrase, the little jokes, the wordplay. And here I have to mention my fave line in all of GoF...that comment of Barty Jr's : "Theres nothing I hate more than a Death Eater who walked free". I LOVED that. I loved it the first time and I still love it each time I read it. I thought Lee Jordan's commentary vey entertaining, and I still find it funny. I laugh at Fred and George still, but maybe a little less since I read the bullying posts. And I'm still proud to hear that "Dumbledore"s man through and through" part as I did the first time. > SSSusan: > By way of an example, I'll say that for me one of the things is the > richness of the characterization. I know many argue that Super! > Ginny popped out of nowhere, but I still think that in many ways > what makes these books so fun is that the world JKR has built is so > richly detailed, that she takes the time to give us so many > conversations, so many snippets of day-to-day life, so much of a > chance to get to know these characters, so that we RECOGNIZE them, > feel we can anticipate some of the things they'll say & do on a > daily basis. (Well, not SNAPE, of course, but he's her Special Case > and too tied into the Mystery aspect of the series to count!) > Elyse: Yeah, that is primarily why I liked it so much the first time I read it. The wizarding world was a complete fantasy, but she made it real with the little character touches, the everyday jokes, the detail,. Her wizarding world may be a fantasy, but the people in it are real, or they feel real, like ordinary ones we would meet on the street. I dont like Super Ginny, but I did laugh at the "Oddment. Nitwit. Blubber. Tweak" It did seem like Dumbledore. I'm glad she remembered it in the funeral. I guess I'm rambling, but what I wanted to say was this: Although the fandom has made me dislike a number of things about the series and the WW and even certain characters, like Carol, I stil think its infinitely more interesting than the real world. The characters are still, people I would like to meet. The jokes are still funny. And the whole experience of HP, not just the books, but the fandom, the movies, the ideas it brought to my attention, the new people I met, well, I loved it. When the 7th book comes out, I will say "Sic transit gloria mundi" because I enjoyed every minute of the Harry Potter experience. Elyse From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Fri May 19 13:13:07 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 13:13:07 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152495 "Tonks" wrote: > > > Many here have said that Madam Pinch is really Prince, Snape's > mother. I wonder if Filch is his Muggle father. We think he is a squib, but maybe he is just a nasty Muggle in disguise. Steven1965aaa: In COS he was reading a "quickspell" (something like that, IMR) book, a course designed to help squibs/poor wizards cast simple spells. I doubt he's a muggle. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri May 19 13:53:12 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 13:53:12 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152496 "Ceridwen" > > Ceridwen: > (pulling a chair up to the table and setting out the flavored creamer > to go with the good dish coffee and kuchen) > My inner Pansy is squeeing in delight! > > My Pansy is waiting for the others, with plenty of coffee brewing, or > tea if you'd rather. > Potioncat: Coffe, cake and Snape? Who could ask for more? Yes, please, coffee. I agree to Snape's wit being very appealing, although he needs someone to take him in hand and make him throttle back around the kiddies. Is he "in shape"? Well, he isn't overweight, he has an easy source of nourishing food and he does a great deal of walking. So he may not be a poster boy for aerobics, but I'd say he's in shape. Actually, wizarding folk do a lot of walking, or is that typical for Brits? The students walk to Hogsmeade when you'd think it'd be safe to fly, the Weasleys walk to the portkey, there's a lot of walking just to get to the different classes. Not sure about Slughorn and Sprout. Back to the subject. I was quite horrified to discover (once JKR announced Snape's age) that I was "too old" for canon!Snape. I guess that tells how strong the Rickman influence is. So if I were to look only at the characters that I would be appropriate for....that leaves Dumbledore and the incredibly old looking wizard who came to observe Buckbeak's execution. Oh, and maybe Ollivander. Nott might be a possibilty...OK, the numbers are there, but not sure about the attraction. DD has the clear lead in this case. His own brand of word play and irony, not quite sarcasm, are appealing. He's powerful, he's kind. He's intelligent.(And he's more like Harris than Gambon.) Oh, and if I stretch it a bit, Arthur should be about the right age. He's very appealing. It's easy to get a big dose of movie-contamination and think he's bumbling...he isn't inept in the books. He's a very solid, very dependable, and fairly tolerant man. What's not to like? I'd say he also has the required red hair, but that may be contamination. Is he sexy? We see him as so fatherly through Harry's eyes that it's hard to tell. But the glimpse we get in HBP, and the bits Molly has said in the past, tell me that yeah, Arthur could be sexy. Lupin is sexy in a bad boy way.....Oh, well, ESE!Lupin is sexy.He can thank Pippin for that. Lupin himself is sort of meak and lacks the courage of conviction. Tonks will lead him around all right. Were I a teenager (God forbid, who would ever want to go that more than once!) I'd like Ron. He's a goofy boy, but he won't always be, and his heart is in the right place. The twins are also very, very appealing, but not if you view their pranks with a grown-up eye. And most importantly of all, they all have red hair. That was the number one requirement of my future husband when I was a young teen. Potioncat, enjoying the cake and coffee, and suddenly finding more threads she likes than she can respond to in one day and wishing she could move un-used post quotas up. (but has to go to work anyway so can't.) From pam_rosen at yahoo.com Fri May 19 00:02:09 2006 From: pam_rosen at yahoo.com (Pamela Rosen) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:02:09 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152497 horridporrid03 (Betsy_hp) wrote: So yeah, when it comes to her male characters, JKR's got me. Catherine : As for the adults, with whom I can relate to now, totally hot for Sirius. Not too sure about Snape, he's certainly got the mystery aura about him, I'll give him that...and who wouldn't want to at least *try* to make that man happy? But he's a bit of a challenge, and I dated too many challenges to go for that type anymore. Pam: I have never posted here before (thing about being embarrassed in case I'm wrong) but this one made me jump in with a theory I've been formulating on this topic. I asked myself, what IS this Snape thing? Is it the earlier mentioned "Rickman Effect", or, as a friend of mine assessed, the "Spock Effect" that made women go gaga over emotionally repressed men with tons of baggage? I think it can only be diagnosed by asking yourself if you had a little crush on Snape before you ever saw a film. Like it or not, what you see can influence what you imagine wheen reading. For example, if I were to say, "if they ever decided to put Peeves into the films, the only actor who could do him justice is Rowan Atkinson," and you happened to agree, when reading the books, could you envision anyone else? If yes, then you aren't affected by film decisions in your reading. That's the only way I can explain away what I used to think was a solitary improper affection for an essentially loathsome character. Thoughts? Pam From celizwh at intergate.com Fri May 19 14:39:07 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 14:39:07 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152498 Tonks: > > Many here have said that Madam Pinch is really > > Prince, Snape's mother. I wonder if Filch is his > > Muggle father. We think he is a squib, but maybe > > he is just a nasty Muggle in disguise. houyhnhnm: I am a firm believer in this theory and will remain so until book 7 proves me wrong. But I'm not expecting that to happen with Madam Pince. Filch is a little more iffy. I don't see anything that precludes Filch from being Snape's father, but OTOH, I don't see as much evidence that he is, as I do for Madam Pince being Snape's mother. Potioncat: > Based on the way Snape treats Filch, I don't think > Filch is Snape's father or step-father. And I think > it would gall Snape no end, to have his father serve > as a janitor at the school where Snape was a master. > He might not mind that his father had to work hard, but he wouldn't > want him as part of the staff. houyhnhnm: For me, it would be completely in character for Snape to insist on his father's protection as a condition of turning spy for the Order, then treat him as a servant. He's bound to be at least half ashamed of having a Muggle father. That's the essence of Snape, as I see him: Someone who does the right thing, the dutiful thing, but grudgingly, without graciousness and without charity. One of the reasons I like this theory is that it shows how Snape got that way. His sour disposition is not too surprising if he was the son of two people who are so narrow and suspicious, with an eye out for others' wrongdoing and punishment all the time. Steven1965aaa: > In COS he was reading a "quickspell" (something like that, > IMR) book, a course designed to help squibs/poor wizards > cast simple spells. I doubt he's a muggle. houyhnhnm: Is there any evidence that the KwickSpell course is anything other than a fraud? If it is wishful thinking on the part of a Squib to think he/she can acquire magical abilities that aren't there by taking a correspondence course, couldn't it also be wishful thinking on the part of a Muggle, especially one who has been living entirely among wizards for a dozen or so years. There may be some differences between a Muggle and a Squib such as increase longevity, resistance to physical injury, etc., but is there any evidence that Filch exhibits any of these characteristics. In other words, is there anything Filch does anywhere in the books that could not possibly be done by a Muggle? I can't think of anything. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Fri May 19 14:44:16 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 14:44:16 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152499 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Tom knew, or should have known, that he was consenting to all > this when he got married, and I see no canon that he was incapable > of withholding his consent or that he was so overcome by the potion > that he didn't know what he was doing. Gerry Well, it's quoted time and time again. Dumbledore asks Harry which ways he sees that could make Tom act like that. He names two: a love potion or the imperius curse. Dumbledore does not give any other possibilities but says his guesses are very good. Further: when we sees Ron under the influence of a love potion it is clear that he is completley obsessed. 'Romilda Vane,' said Ron softly, and his whole face seemed to illuminate as he said it, as though hit by a ray of pure sunlight. .... 'I think...Harry, I think I love her,' said Ron in a strangled voice. 'OK,' said Harry, walking up to Ron to get better look at the glazed eyes and the pallid complexion, 'OK ... say, that again with a straight face.' 'I love her, repeated Ron breathlessly, 'Have you seen her hair, it's all black and shiny and silky ... and her eyes?'Her big dark eyes? And her -' 'This is really funny, and everything,' said Harry impatiently, 'but joke's over, all right? Drop it' He turned to leave; he ha dgot two steps towards the door when a crashing blow hit him on t he right ear. Staggering he looked round. Ron's fist was drawn right back, his face contorted with rage, he was about to strike again. And all that because Harry made a simple comment. You argued earlier that Ron only thought he was in love, so Tom could have questioned his love for Merope. Yet when I read this scene I see a very deep infatuation which does not leave any room for rational thinking on the subject. Slughorn may talk about what a love potion does, but what we see here is the effect of a love potion and this potion is a very strong drug. If Merope fed Tom something like that, it would indeed be comparable to the Imperius Curse. I think that is the reason we get this scene. To get an idea what happened to Tom. Tom consented while drugged. Now in a Muggle court of law this would have been inexplainable. But I bet it would have held with the Wizengamot. ' > > By the laws and customs of his time, Merope had the right to her > husband's support if he had the means to do it unless the marriage > was proved to be invalid. I am not saying she had *earned* the right. > We have rights to all sorts of things we have done nothing to deserve. > But legally, and, by the morals of her time, morally, she was wronged, > IMO. Gerry Only because the laws of her time did not know that what she did to Tom was possible. If Muggles knew this was possible, the law would have provided for that and she would have no right to anything at all, because she got married by committing a crime. > > Pippin: > According to Slughorn, the potion does not produce feelings of > love -- it produces feelings of obsession and infatuation. As much > of the novel turns on the difference between love and such feelings, > I think it has to be relevant whether there was any way Tom could > have distinguished between love and infatuation before taking such > a solemn and in his time nearly irrevocable step as marriage. Gerry Well, what we see from Ron there is not much room for any other thought. Keeping in mind that DD's guess was right and she did not use Imperius. > > Canon suggests that had he been willing to wait, Merope would have > tired of his make-believe passion and revealed herself before she > became pregnant. Gerry Can you quote that? Because I cannot find any canon that suggests that. It might even have been her pregnancy that made her stop giving him the potion, believing that now she was having -their- baby he would never go away. > > Canon implies the villagers believed Tom's talk of being "hoodwinked" > referred to a fake pregnancy, because that was the readiest explanation > for his hasty marriage. Dumbledore says that what Tom > really meant was that he was enchanted, but is it not valid to > ask whether the enchantment produced the haste as well as the > desire? Gerry Why would that be relevant? He was obsessed, believed she was the love of his life. Why should he have waited? To me this is a very backhand way of blaming the victim. He acted in good faith. She knew differently. > > Pippin: > Your example illustrates my point very well. If Tom had consented > in fear of his life, he would have been entitled to an annulment > in 1926. But I don't think people would have recognized artificial > emotional attachment as a problem, because they didn't see the lack > of attachment as invalidating the marriage. Gerry No, they did not believe magic. He might have done > better to claim that Merope didn't tell him she was a witch, but it > would still be hard, IMO, for him to prove that he wouldn't have > married her if he'd known that. Gerry Well, as Muggle's don't believe in witches, if he told them she was a witch they would either have thought he spoke figuratively or that he was insane. Muggle law is simply not equipped to deal with these cases. It still is not, because in current times, though a divorce of course is possible an annulment for these reasons would still be laughed out of court. And if the wronged muggle would not have made any legal provisions, he would still loose money, property etc. Just as a Muggle who killed somebody while under Imperius would go to prison for a long, long time. Gerry From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 14:59:42 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 14:59:42 -0000 Subject: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152500 We know that DD didn't try to kill Voldemort at the MOM in the OOP. When Voldemort taunts him about that, DD cryptically responds that there are worse things than death. While I'm sure DD heartily believes that is true, I don't believe that is the real reason he didn't kill LV. We also know that Snape has come face to face with LV since LV's return to corporeal form. So, if Snape is really DD's man, why didn't he kill LV then? Sure, the DEs probably would have finished Snape off at that point, but if Snape truly is a member of the Order, wouldn't he be prepared to make that sacrifice? (Of course, I am assuming that LV allows his DEs to be "armed" with their wands in his presence, in case he needs them to defend him.) The only reason I can come up with is that DD fears that Harry will die if anyone but Harry kills LV. Perhaps DD believes this because of the prophesy or the connection forged between Harry and LV by the scar, or both? Any other ideas? Angie From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Fri May 19 15:27:02 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 15:27:02 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152501 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: >> > Is there any evidence that the KwickSpell course is anything other than a fraud? If it is wishful thinking on the part of a Squib to think he/she can acquire magical abilities that aren't there by taking a correspondence course, couldn't it also be wishful thinking on the part of a Muggle, especially one who has been living entirely among wizards for a dozen or so years. > > There may be some differences between a Muggle and a Squib such as > increase longevity, resistance to physical injury, etc., but is there any evidence that Filch exhibits any of these characteristics. In other words, is there anything Filch does anywhere in the books that could not possibly be done by a Muggle? I can't think of anything. > Steven1965aaa: Actually, that's a good point. I stand corrected. I don't know if this theory is correct, but I don't see any holes in it, in other words there's nothing I can think of which would disprove it, and it would certainly fill in the gaps. I believe that DD's momentary hestitation (as if he was trying to decide something) when pressed by Harry in his office right after Harry finds out that Snape was the spy behind the door at the Hogshead, is an indication that DD does in fact have some secret reason for trusting Snape above and beyone what he's told Harry. I think he was hestitating because he was thinking about whether or not he should now reveal this secret reason to Harry. But if Snape's parents were trying to hide, wouldn't calling herself "Madam Pince" be a pretty poor disguise for "Madam Prince"? From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Fri May 19 15:33:54 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 15:33:54 -0000 Subject: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152502 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > > > The only reason I can come up with is that DD fears that Harry will die if anyone but Harry kills LV. Perhaps DD believes this because of the prophesy or the connection forged between Harry and LV by the scar, or both? > > Any other ideas? > Steven1965aaa: Well, the stated reason is that 1st you have to get rid of all the horocuxes, then you go after Voldemort. If you "kill" him first, you could then go after the horocruxes at your leisure. But even after you got rid of all the horocruxes, there would still be 1 soul piece left, the piece that was in VM when you "killed" him. He would not be "vanquished". VM would again be floating around Albania or somewhere, trying to possess rats and snakes. Eventually he'd come back, albeit severely weakened by the destruction of his horocruxes. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 15:54:02 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 15:54:02 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152503 > > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > Am I truly in a small minority of people who still really LIKES the > > Potterverse? still guffaws at some of JKR's clever turns of phrase? > > still marvels at her creativity? still shakes her head that this > > writer can have us arguing after SIX books about whether a character > > is evil, good, neither or both? > > > > Am I in a small minority of people who still actually LIKES Harry > > himself? > bboyminn responded: > Certainly, I like the jokes and the quirks, but what > really makes me laugh out loud is recognising life. When I read > something and I get that 'Oooh, I know just what you mean. Been there, > done that.' feeling. > > So, yes, I get the joke, I see the comedy, but what really gets me are > those 'everyday, every life' moments of self-recognition. > > Just passing it along. > Angie here: First, I'm in shock to think it is only a minority that still likes the series and still likes Harry.... Second, I still marvel at JKR can keep my interest, but she has mastered the art of keeping us guessing, hasn't she? I can usually see something coming a mile away in ordinary books, but the only thing I've been able to figure out so far in this series is the Harry/Ginny relationship. (I absolutely loved the way she used the love potion to reveal to the careful reader that Harry was finally going to realize his feelings for Ginny, even before Harry knew it - now that was clever!). I suppose JKR's true genius will be revealed in Book 7,in the manner in which she ties (some of) the loose ends together. I mean, yeah, I wanna know whether Snape is good or evil, but I'm equally looking forward to finding out how she reveals that to us. This series resonates with me because JKR so ably shows that emotions are universal, whether experienced in the WW or the Muggle world. The best way I've heard the series described is that it is about the relationships between people who happen to do magic or who happen to be wizards, something like that. Let me say it again: It's about the relationships, not the magic. The magic is simply a very clever foundation on which those relationships are established. Third, for me, it is precisely those "everyday, every life moments of self recognition" (wonderful, Steve) with which JKR depicts the WW that makes me laugh out loud (very few authors or even movies do that), groan with angst, or feel exhultant. In other words, it's because we relate to those moments that they have such meaning, that they make us laugh or make us remember. That sounds almost redundant, but it's true: we couldn't appreciate those moments if we didn't recognize them and relate to them. If we are the character's ages, we can relate b/c we're either going thru what they are now (or have recently) or know someone who has. Adults can relate to the adult characters as well as the younger ones b/c we've been through those awkward teenage years. Fourth, I still like Harry, mostly because he's not perfect. He's insecure, prideful, temperamental and a lot of other things that we would be if we were in his shoes. But you know that he's going to try and do the right thing. Not because he has to, but because he chooses to -- because it's the right thing. I think a lot of so- called adults could learn from Harry in that respect, myself included. From witherwing at sbcglobal.net Fri May 19 15:51:06 2006 From: witherwing at sbcglobal.net (Rebecca Scalf) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 08:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sexy Snape In-Reply-To: <20060519013454.12934.qmail@web61318.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060519155106.33289.qmail@web81207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152504 --- Joe Goodwin wrote: I can see him being skinny. Late nights, no exercise that we know of and his sallow skin and bad hair. All lead me more to believe that he gets little exercise, little exposure to the sun and doesn't eat right either. Witherwing: When I first read the Sorcerer's Stone I read it aloud with my husband. I remember we pictured the characters quite differently, especially Hermione. I pictured her short, a bit stout, and a nest of dark, bushy hair crammed into a bun on top of her head. As for Snape, I pictured him as Homer Simpson's boss, Mr. Burns, only with black, greasy hair... I think at the time, to my imaginings, Mr. Burns was close in personality to Prof. Snape - unconscionably rude and mean-spirited; also the long, pointy nose. Bent, skinny and bitter. I remember the shock of hearing that Alan Rickman had been cast in the part, and I think the Rickman Snape is a wonderful creation, but totally separate from how I imagined him from reading the books. From witherwing at sbcglobal.net Fri May 19 16:44:53 2006 From: witherwing at sbcglobal.net (Rebecca Scalf) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 09:44:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What's fun about the HPs? - favorite lines of all time In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060519164453.98105.qmail@web81201.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152505 Alla wrote: "Seriously evil wizard coming through" is one of my favorite lines of all time. Witherwing: Alla, which book is this in? It is only vaguely familiar - help! I have come out of lurkdom to reply to this thread. I have to say I still get a lot of joy from reading HP. I love Rowling's writing on every level. Besides the fantastic plot and characters, I enjoy the individual words she uses, esp. proper nouns, character and place names. Think of the shop names in Diagon Alley... the candy names in Honeydukes...I think the entire series is a fantastic read just for the names alone! I am embarrassed to tell you how many reads before I discovered the joke of Knockturn Ally, but I want to keep reading the books to see what else I can discover. Not everyone enjoys reading the same books again, and again, but for people like us, who do, don't you feel like it's the very grammar and combination of syllables which keep you coming back for more? It's like poetry, but seven novels' worth! And the fun way JKR puts words together... I get a giggle out of "Snape snapped," and "Sirius said seriously," every read. I agree with the post upthread that recommended everyone try listening to the books if you haven't yet. Think of it as the difference between looking at a photo album, and then just listening to a friend describe the photos to you one by one. You will be amazed at how different the experience of the books is as the story enters your mind through your ears rather than your eyes. My daughter listens to them, and I love walking into her room and just hearing random snippets. Yes, the plot is fantastic, but the dialog and descriptions are too. It's like looking at a postcard of a place you spent the summer, and it looks familiar and yet fantastically different captured in a single frame. And though I've read each book at least five times, sometimes I think I'm hearing something totally new. I would love to hear which other authors people on this list enjoy reading again and again. For me there are three others: AS Byatt, Ursula K. LeGuin and Frank Herbert. What I think they have in common with JK Rowling is a linguistical love of the English Language. I would love to hear from you all, Witherwing ELFY NOTE: If you would like to respond *only* to Witherwing's final paragraph, concerning other authors you enjoy reading again & again, please do so over on our sister list, Off-Topic Chatter, or to Witherwing directly. Thanks! - Shorty Elf From celizwh at intergate.com Fri May 19 17:26:35 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 17:26:35 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152506 Steven1965aaa: > But if Snape's parents were trying to hide, > wouldn't calling herself "Madam Pince" be a > pretty poor disguise for "Madam Prince"? houyhnhnm; Especially when it's an anagram for "I'm a Prince". :-) It is a poor choice for an alias, I agree. (Although she would have been Mrs. Snape for the previous twenty years or so.) But then "a lot of the greatest wizards haven't got an ounce of logic" so they probably don't get word play or anagrams either. From lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk Fri May 19 16:14:15 2006 From: lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk (Tara Tierney) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 16:14:15 -0000 Subject: My Theories In-Reply-To: <20060518222125.64915.qmail@web39115.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152507 Mathias Forseti wrote: > > WHO IS RAB?: > I think its Regulus Black. > > - Did Kreacher take it [locket] from the bag (since he was > taking everything else)? Did he give it to Bellatrix or Draco's > family? > > Life Debt: > > In Book #3 DD tells Harry that Wormtail will be forever in his > debt because Harry spared his life. We all know that James saved > Snape's life back in their school days. Would this life-debt be > carried on to family once the saver's life has ended?? So would > this mean that LV has two servants that are now in the debt of > Harry Potter? > > Is Petunia a squib? > > I look back at all the books and I think Petunia or the Evans > family may have had wizardry in it before Lily. She has some > similarities, attitude wise, to Argus Filch, the janitor. She > seems so bitter towards the wizards because her parents were so > proud of Lily getting her letter. If most Muggles don't even know > about the Wizards why would the parents be proud? > > And of course my Dumbledore isn't dead theory: > Looking back I don't think Dumbledore is dead. > > > > - Here's the biggest question though: WHERE'S DUMBLEDORE'S > WAND?? Remember when Aragorn died and Slug sang that sad song. > At the end of the verses they say they broke his wand in half. > If this is the custom of wizards then why didn't they snap > Dumbledore's? It went over the wall with him. Lunasa: I think RAB is Regulus, as well. I think Regulus either destroyed the Locket or Dung stole it. I don't think Kreachur can give away his masters property even to a branch of the Black family. About the Life Debt, is it an actual binding type of contract like the Unbreakable Vow, or was Dumbledore being figurative? I've never really got the Life Debt thing. I've always read it that Dumbledore reasons that because Harry spared Wormtail's life Wormtail wouldn't want to be in his debt, rather than it actually being a Contract type bond. I've never really thought of Petunia as being that important actually... Perhaps I shouldn't overlook her so much. But even if there is a faint history of magic in the Evans family, could Petunia be considered a squib if there hasn't been a witch or wizard in the family for a long time? I think either Regulus Black or Dumbledore is still alive. Which one I'm not sure. But both are quite likely in my opinion. And didn't Malfoy disarm Dumbledore on the tower? From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri May 19 17:53:10 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 17:53:10 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152508 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "festuco" wrote: > > Tom consented while drugged. Now in a Muggle court of law this would > have been inexplainable. But I bet it would have held with the > Wizengamot. Pippin: Would it? Wizards invented the Goblet of Fire, which seems to reflect a moral philosophy very much like the one informing the old idea of marriage. Just as the Goblet chose the best person to compete in the contest regardless of that person's desire to compete, God was supposed to choose the best people to be married to one another. As interfering with the Goblet's choice was taboo, so was interfering with marriage. Lack of desire to compete did not invalidate the Goblet's choice, and lack of desire to be married did not invalidate a marriage. The marriage was made as soon as the partners gave free consent in a recognized way...and the law in 1926 did not recognize persuasion by means other than force as coercion. Annulments were very rare and not given on grounds of emotional bondage, period. There was a time earlier when annulments were only given for consanguinity or prior contract, so even if someone were holding a weapon to your head when you said, "I do" you were still legally married. Think of it! Things had progressed some by 1926, but not as far as you seem to think, from my admittedly internet-based and non-expert research. I am not so sure that if a court were told (in 1926) that Merope had dosed Tom with some exotic South American herb that had made him desire her so much that he wanted to marry her, they wouldn't have thought it was God's will. After all, it isn't against the law to feed people compounds that aren't illegal or poisonous. "Go on taking the herb. Next!" It sounds completely off the wall to us, but our way of thinking would have sounded just as mad and immoral to them. Pippin: > > > > Canon suggests that had he been willing to wait, Merope would have > > tired of his make-believe passion and revealed herself before she > > became pregnant. > > Gerry > Can you quote that? Because I cannot find any canon that suggests > that. It might even have been her pregnancy that made her stop giving > him the potion, believing that now she was having -their- baby he > would never go away. Pippin: "Again this is guesswork," said Dumbeldore,"but I believe that Merope, who was deeply in love with her husband, could not bear to continue enslaving him by magical means." --HBP ch 10 > Gerry (responding to the idea that Tom should have waited: > Why would that be relevant? He was obsessed, believed she was the love > of his life. Why should he have waited? To me this is a very backhand > way of blaming the victim. He acted in good faith. She knew differently. > > Pippin: The exchange in chapter 5 where Molly explains why she thinks Bill and Fleur have hurried into their engagement and should delay reflects a view most people would have held in 1926. It also may reflect JKR's own personal experience and her first disastrous marriage. Tom would have been been taught long before he met Merope that even if he and his future intended were sure they were meant for each other, they'd be expected to wait if they hadn't known each other for very long. The potion made Tom desire someone whom he never would have thought suitable without it. But did it produce the urgency to consummate the relationship that (presumably) made him rush into marriage? Or was that his own headstrong nature? Ron becomes very eager to see Romilda, and Harry becomes reckless under the spell of the Veela, but in both cases, they only seem reckless to get their attention, not to possess them. I utterly agree with you that Merope took advantage of her husband- to-be. I'm just pointing out that in 1926, the discovery of that would not necesssarily have invalidated the marriage, even if a crime had been committed in the process, just as the discovery that Harry had been forced to enter the contest through criminal activity did not invalidate the goblet's choice. He was still bound by the contract. So was Tom. So much for the good old days. Pippin glad to find some reason for the goblet of fire besides a plot device From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 18:28:21 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 18:28:21 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152509 > >>Pam: > I have never posted here before (thing about being embarrassed in > case I'm wrong) but this one made me jump in with a theory I've > been formulating on this topic. > I asked myself, what IS this Snape thing? Is it the earlier > mentioned "Rickman Effect", or, as a friend of mine assessed, > the "Spock Effect" that made women go gaga over emotionally > repressed men with tons of baggage? > I think it can only be diagnosed by asking yourself if you had a > little crush on Snape before you ever saw a film. > Betsy Hp: For me I can say with utter confidence that it's *not* Rickman. When Snape first swooped into the Potions classroom I sat up and took notice. I *was* pleased when I realized Rickman would be playing him in the films, because I do like Rickman. However, the more I got to know canon!Snape, the less pleased with Rickman I was. And now I firmly seperate the two men. When I picture Snape I don't picture Rickman. Lucius Malfoy is a different story. I have such a hard time seperating canon!Lucius from the actor (spaced on the name, sorry) that I cannot honestly say that any attraction there isn't the fault of the incredibly sexy actor with his non-canon pimp cane, and non- canon flowing blond locks. (The actor does a great job with the bad- boy stuff. But I'm not sure canon!Lucius would have pulled that aspect out all by himself.) But Snape is sexy all by his hot little self. :) > >>Potioncat: > > Back to the subject. I was quite horrified to discover (once JKR > announced Snape's age) that I was "too old" for canon!Snape. > Betsy Hp: Girl, you're never "too old"! I'm totally waiting in the wings for Harry and Draco to hit legal age. I do think Draco has a certain "Lord Peter Whimsy" appeal to him, that I think he could well achieve once he grows up a bit. > >>Alla: > > What I am trying to say is that yes, I do have that desire to hug > Sirius and to make it better and of course to mother Harry and to > make it better for him, BUT when I think about Sirius and am about > to go into daydreaming part, my imagination always gives me > reality check of the sort. As in that Sirius is way too damaged to > be a good husband or boyfriend. Does that make sense? > Betsy Hp: If we're talking actual *relationships* that does narrow the pool considerably, I think. Because while JKR's men are hot, they're also pretty disturbed. I think Ron (when he grows up) is probably the most stable of the main characters. Though, Draco could give Ron a bit of a run. He's had the most stable relationship, IMO, in the Potterverse, with his comfortable friendship morphing into dating thing with Pansy. Plus, you know Draco is even more of a family guy than Ron is. Betsy Hp (wanting to comment more on this thread, but posting from work, and having to stop) From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri May 19 18:35:09 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 18:35:09 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152510 Pam: > I have never posted here before (thing about being embarrassed in case I'm wrong) but this one made me jump in with a theory I've been formulating on this topic. Ceridwen: Hi, Pam! Nice to meet you and read your theory. Pam: > I asked myself, what IS this Snape thing? Is it the earlier mentioned "Rickman Effect", or, as a friend of mine assessed, the "Spock Effect" that made women go gaga over emotionally repressed men with tons of baggage? Ceridwen: I liked, or at least was favorably inclined toward Snape, before I ever saw the films. I love the 'Spock Effect' comment, it just might be true. But, maybe there's another twisted, tortured soul with a big nose even farther back: Sherlock Holmes. I think both Snape and Spock trade on the same sorts of feelings from readers as Sherlock. And, hey, they all have names beginning with the letter 'S'! I think that a certain segment of the population do 'go gaga over emotionally repressed men with tons of baggage'. Lupin is another one who has that going for him - he has tons of baggage, and secrets he can't reveal. But Lupin is more... open, is it? He seems more vulnerable. Snape stands behind a wall of sarcasm thicker than a castle's walls. There is no kindness, no empathy there. I think Lupin would hate to hurt anyone's feelings, which has led to the problem of Prefect Lupin ignoring his friends when they got rambunctious as we saw in the Pensieve. Thinking back to Holmes again, and sorry to bring in Miniseries! Contamination, one thing I liked more about Jeremy Brett's portrayal than Basil Rathbone's, was the high-strung, taut as a slingshot tension Brett brought to the role. I thought it was very in-canon. Snape, and to a lesser degree Spock, also have that tension. They are all outsiders in their own way; they are all smart, and many say they are brilliant; there is some sort of dual nature, less obvious with Holmes (man outside his time to be simplistic) but very direct with Spock (half-Vulcan) and with Snape (DDM & DE; Half-blood); they all seem divorced from their feelings most of the time, and with Spock it's even cultural; then, there is the mystery as SSSusan said. Maybe the key isn't whether someone liked Snape before they saw the movie, but whether they like other characters who seem* similar to Snape (*given that his story arc isn't finished)? To try and bring it back to canon (it's an interesting topic, I would hate to see it disappear to the OT board) each character seems to have his or her own individual area. With Snape, it's the tension, the voice and wordplay, the sarcasm, and quite a few other things which make him uniquely himself. He may cross roads with Lupin in the heavy baggage department, but Lupin then goes on his own way, in his own way. This is another thing I like about the books - the characters are not just carbon copies of each other, they have personalities. Sometimes not the nicest, but aside from Voldemort, I don't think there is a single all-good or all-bad character in the series. Which is very much like life. Ceridwen. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri May 19 18:50:58 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 18:50:58 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152511 > Pippin: > The marriage was made as soon as the partners gave free consent > in a recognized way...and the law in 1926 did not recognize persuasion by > means other than force as coercion. Annulments were very rare and > not given on grounds of emotional bondage, period. There was a > time earlier when annulments were only given for consanguinity or > prior contract, so even if someone were holding a weapon to your head > when you said, "I do" you were still legally married. Think of it! Things > had progressed some by 1926, but not as far as you seem to think, > from my admittedly internet-based and non-expert research. a_svirn: On the other hand, it was possible in those times to get rid of unwanted wife if you proved that she was a witch. Things progressed somewhat by 1926, but one wonders if, perhaps, they were better off in 1526 in this respect. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 19:02:21 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 19:02:21 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot In-Reply-To: <48d.8e9fe.319eb8f0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152512 Nikkalmati wrote: > I have not yet decided either way regarding which came first the chicken or the egg (the order to kill DD or the Cabinets). Both theories appear possible. However, I am somewhat confused about SS' role here. > SS tells NM and BB that he thinks LV intends him to do "it" in the end. The reader knows "it" is DD's demise. Yet LV apparently has not told SS directly to do it himself, if needed. SS is pretty much left in the dark by LV and DM. He doesn't know when this is supposed to happen and his attempts to pump DM (i.e. Slughorn's party) tell us SS doesn't know DM's plan. How then is SS supposed to step up and take DM's place if needed? How can it be a test, if SS has not been told what to do? Also, no one knew DD would be in such bad shape that night, so did LV expect SS to be able to take on DD or did he think SS and 5 DE's would be enough? Wasn't it in OTP that DD knocked out all the Aurors in his office without breaking a sweat? Did LV even know what DM was planning? Any thoughts? Carol responds: Like you, I've wondered about Snape's remark ("I think he expects me to do it in the end"). Clearly, as you say, he's left in the dark about Draco's plan for getting the DEs into Hogwarts and does not even know they're there until Flitwick tells him. He's very quiet and thoughtful as he says these words, as if he's not absolutely sure, but I think he's stating a real expectation (or a real fear, if he's DDM). I think, as I've said, that Draco went to Voldemort with his Vanishing Cabinet discovery and Voldemort immediately turned it into an assignment to kill Dumbledore, which would serve his own evil ends whether it succeeded or failed. (I don't want to repeat the arguments, which can be found upthread.) Apparently Voldemort told Snape about Draco's "job" (killing DD) but not the "plan" for accomplishing it. And yet I can't conceive of LV's not knowing what Draco intended to do, which required the knowledge and cooperation of certain DEs and therefore of Voldemort. (Bellatrix [I assume that's whom you mean by "BB"] may or may not have aided him. She was apparently trying to thwart Snape's efforts to discover the plan, but I don't see how she could have, for example, Imperio'd Rosmerta since she's on the MoM's most wanted list and unable to appear in public.) At any rate, Snape, like Narcissa, knows that Draco is no match for Dumbledore and expects him to fail. (Nutcase!Bellatrix is perfectly willing for him to die serving the cause.) It may simply be Snape's instinct, his knowledge of Voldemort and of his own position at Hogwarts (supposed loyal DE who also happens to be Draco's HoH), that leads him to suspect (or fear) that Voldemort wants him to "do the deed" in the end. But I think it's something more. Voldemort ordered Snape to apply for the doomed DADA position in the first place (just possibly this idea was planted by young Snape himself in cooperation with Dumbledore, but that's beside the point). Voldemort knows that the position is cursed (he cursed it himself) and that Snape, if he survives, will end up back with the DEs if he's given the DADA position. What better way for the curse to act than to force Snape to kill DD or die in the attempt? If LV has put pressure on Snape to apply again for the DADA position, Snape, who knows that LV has assigned Draco to kill Dumbledore with every expectation that he'll fail in the attempt, may suspect that LV wants the DADA curse to force him to show his loyalty by killing DD or die. Meanwhile, Snape knows full well that Dumbledore will have no choice but to hire him for the DADA position. All DD's reasons for hesitating are no longer valid: LV is in power and DD needs Snape's expertise not only as a teacher but also for the other duties attached to the DADA position (dealing with any Dark magic that threatens the school, the students, or the faculty--Snape has already saved him from the ring Horcrux curse), and he's found the perfect substitute for Snape as Potions master (and future HoH of Slytherin). So Snape either knows that he'll be given the DADA position or he has it already (despite his misleading words to Bellatrix). If so, and if he's DDM, he must fear that the curse will take the form of forcing him to try to kill Dumbledore--unless he can somehow discover and thwart Draco's plan. I think that's why he agrees to take the UV to watch over and protect Draco. Unfortunately, the unexpected third provision leads to exactly the situation he was trying to prevent. As for why he agrees to the third provision, (aside from the fact that refusing to do so would undo all the efforts he's made to gain Narcissa's trust, persuade Bellatrix of his loyalty to LV, and, most important, protect Draco), I think he knows that for all his expertise in potions and duelling, *he's* no match for Dumbledore, either, and he suspects that in the end, if he's forced to face Dumbledore and attempt to "do the deed," the UV will kill him but DD will survive. I agree with you that the last thing Snape expects is to see the wizard who so easily thwarted Fudge and his cronies when they tried to arrest him and who defeated LV in battle in the MoM disarmed, weak, and helpless on the tower. He knew about the DADA curse, about Draco's assignment, about the UV, but he could not have expected that Dumbledore would be the one to die. So, IMO, he senses in "Spinner's End" that LV will put him to the test by somehow forcing him either to kill DD when (not if) Draco fails or to be killed himself. But I think that he hopes the stand-off can somehow be avoided by telling DD that Draco is trying to kill him, and that, by working with Dumbledore, he can succeed in protecting Draco from death or the act of murder even if it means dying himself. If I'm right, then part of LV's plan is indeed the loyalty of the one he believed had left him forever and forcing his hand. Whether or not LV knew about the UV, which occurs after Snape states his suspicions about LV's expetations), he knew about the DADA curse because he had place it himself. And he may have hoped all along that hiring Snape to teach that cursed subject would bring about Dumbledore's doom. Carol, hoping that this is a plausible explanation and knowing perfectly well that it's only one way of putting together the pieces of canon that JKR has given us From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 18:37:03 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 18:37:03 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152513 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > > Leslie41: > > Again, fallacious reasoning. Just because someone does not put a > stop to something, that doesn't mean they APPROVE of it. Of course it does, IMO. Or, at the very least, it provides presumptive evidence that they approve. And until JKR specifically tells us otherwise, I say that the evidence against DD is pretty solid in this regard. Indeed, the little indication she has given us makes things look much, much worse for the "epitome of goodness," not better. > > Leslie41: > > And I would say when we judge his teaching style, we should consider > the fact that Snape's students learn an awful lot as a result of his > nastiness. > Which is, once again IMO, absolutely and totally irrelevent. The ends do not justify the means, particularly with regard to the abuse of children. If JKR tries to pull the "it was okay because they learn important lessons" card, I would say she has failed utterly and reprehensibly, as DD has failed utterly and reprehensibly, by approving of the abuse of children. Lupinlore From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri May 19 19:10:08 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 19:10:08 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152514 > Ceridwen: > I liked, or at least was favorably inclined toward Snape, before I > ever saw the films. I love the 'Spock Effect' comment, it just might > I think that a certain segment of the population do 'go gaga over > emotionally repressed men with tons of baggage'. Lupin is another > one who has that going for him - he has tons of baggage, and secrets > he can't reveal. But Lupin is more... open, is it? He seems more > vulnerable. Snape stands behind a wall of sarcasm thicker than a > castle's walls. There is no kindness, no empathy there. I think > Lupin would hate to hurt anyone's feelings, which has led to the > problem of Prefect Lupin ignoring his friends when they got > rambunctious as we saw in the Pensieve. Pippin::passes round the cream cakes:: I definitely went for Snape before I saw the movies. I think there's a lot to the repressed/emotional baggage theory. I've never felt attracted to Sirius, maybe because he's too sure of himself. Snape is at least apprehensive on occasion. Lupin surprised me -- I never thought he was sexy until I deduced that he was a villain. Far from being open, ESE!Lupin is keeping one part of himself hidden indeed. But as he seems to have this nasty habit of trying to kill anyone who gets too close to his secrets, I'll have to pass. Snape, though -- I'm definitely too old, too married and too staid for him, but that's real life. Fantasy is another matter. Pippin From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Fri May 19 19:16:56 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 19:16:56 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152515 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > Steven1965aaa: > > > But if Snape's parents were trying to hide, > > wouldn't calling herself "Madam Pince" be a > > pretty poor disguise for "Madam Prince"? > > houyhnhnm; > > Especially when it's an anagram for "I'm a Prince". :-) It is a poor choice for an alias, I agree. (Although she would have been Mrs. Snape for the previous twenty years or so.) But then "a lot of the greatest wizards haven't got an ounce of logic" so they probably don't get word play or anagrams either. Steven1965aaa: Good one. Would have been poor judgment in selecting the name, but not as bad as thinking a cheese caldron was a good idea whose time had come. That makes me wonder though, I'm terrible with the timing/dates analysis, but given the ages and the date of the HBP potions book, is it possible that Prince went to Hogwarts at the same time as LV and Hagrid? If he knew her then, he would have known her as Prince. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri May 19 19:44:40 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 19:44:40 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152516 Steven1965aaa: > > Good one. Would have been poor judgment in selecting the name, but > not as bad as thinking a cheese caldron was a good idea whose time > had come. That makes me wonder though, I'm terrible with the > timing/dates analysis, but given the ages and the date of the HBP > potions book, is it possible that Prince went to Hogwarts at the > same time as LV and Hagrid? If he knew her then, he would have > known her as Prince. Ceridwen: I have some trouble assigning Eileen Prince a birthdate which would place her at Hogwarts at the same time as Hagrid and Riddle. She could have been an older mother, of course, but if Snape and his yearmates were all born around 1958 - 1960, and if Eileen followed the then-current trend of marrying soon after school, she would have been 18 - 20 years old, give or take, which would place her in the graduating class of 1956, 1957, 1958, or 1959 at the latest. Riddle attended Hogwarts in the 1940s, if his time there was fifty years before Harry's. As for the book, it could have been second-hand when Eileen got it, or it could have been new, but still from that earlier printing. I don't have the book handy, but I seem to recall that they didn't give a year that it was issued, it was only said to be about fifty years old. So, a clue from the date of the book would still place Eileen Prince at least a couple of years behind Tom Riddle, since the year, at 'around fifty years earlier', would be somewhere around 1946. Most sites I've seen where there is a timeline place Riddle as leaving Hogwarts around 1945. There's nothing to say that Eileen was not an older mother, though. It does happen. The Potters were supposed to be older parents who doted on their sole offspring, James. Ceridwen. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri May 19 19:59:37 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 19:59:37 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? - favorite lines of all time In-Reply-To: <20060519164453.98105.qmail@web81201.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152517 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Scalf wrote: > > Alla wrote: > "Seriously evil wizard coming through" is one of my > favorite lines of all time. > > Witherwing: > Alla, which book is this in? It is only vaguely > familiar - help! Geoff: Canon searching service to your rescue: :-) 'But Harry was glad that most people were leaving. He was tired of people skirting around him in the corridors, as though he was about to sprout fangs or spit poison; tired of all the muttering, pointing and hissing as he passed. Fred and George, however, found all this very funny. They went out of their way to march ahead of Harry down the corridors, shouting, "Make way for the heir of Slytherin, seriously evil wizard coming through... "' (COS "The Polyjuice Potion" p.157 UK edition) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 20:40:33 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 20:40:33 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch and Polyjuiced Draco (was: Why DD trust Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152518 Potioncat wrote: > In HBP Hermione calls Filch a wizard. That surprised me. We are sure, aren't we, that he's a Squib? Carol responds: That surprised me, too. Isn't there some reference, somewhere, to Filch as "a failed wizard"? And Arabella Figg says that she's never so much as transfigured a teabag (OoP, "A peck of Owls"), indicating that she has at least tried to do so. So maybe she's a "failed witch"?) (I still hope she's the one who'll do magic late in life in OoP. I can't see her whacking a DE with catfood cans.) Potioncat: > Based on the way Snape treats Filch, I don't think Filch is Snape's > father or step-father. Carol: I agree. While they both prowl the corridors to catch rule-breakers, it's clear that Snape, who is much younger than Filch, is in charge. He's a teacher and a Head of House; Filch is just the caretaker. I don't think he would treat his father in that way, whether he loved or hated him. Nor do I think that Snape, who prided himself on the Prince half of his heritage, would want anything to do with his Muggle father, especially if that father was abusive to him and his mother. Also, if Filch were the man in Snape's childhood memory, Harry would have recognized him instantly. (Of course, the hook-nosed man could be Grandpa Prince rather than Tobias Snape, but that's another topic.) There's no physical resemblance between Snape and Filch. Snape has black hair, a sallow complexion (cometimes described as pale), and a hooked nose. Filch has quivering jowls and lamplike eyes that resemble Mrs. Norris's, very different from Snape's black eyes, which make Harry think of a dark tunnel (perhaps because he's using Occlumency to prevent Harry from reading his thoughts). I can't remember any other distinguishing features, but as often as Harry has seen Filch and Snape together, surely even he would have noticed the resemblance if there were any. (Irma Pince does at least have a hooked nose and a name similar to Eileen Prince's, but it was the man in the memory, not the woman, who had a hooked nose, and the description of Eileen Pince in her school photo doesn't suggest that she had a hooked nose, either.) More important, if Filch were a Muggle, he wouldn't be able to see Hogwarts, nor would he long for the old days when caretakers at Hogwarts used whips and hung students by their wrists like medieval prisoners. No, Filch seems to me to be part of the WW yet not fully able to participate in it, which accounts for his envy of the students and his malice toward them. Also, no Muggle would have ordered a book on remedial spellcasting. What would be the point? Filch is hoping that his magical blood will somehow be activated. But Muggle!Tobias (who must surely be dead) would have no such hopes. Nor would a Muggle have an almost psychic relationship with a cat (that familiar of so many witches in folklore). Note the resemblance in this respect to Mrs. Figg (who, oddly, has the same initials). Potioncat: > Harry and Hermione hear a noise and a moment later Pince comes out. She gets upset about the book and grabs it. > > Much later in HBP we learn that Draco was in the library listening to H&H, and it must have been this same time because of what he says he heard. (based on what he tells DD on the tower.) So, I think in this chapter, Pince is really polyjuiced Draco. Draco knows Harry is doing so well in Potions because of the book and Draco wants it too. He's overheard Hermione talking about the spells that Harry's found in it. Carol: That's a very interesting possibility, and we do know that Draco is polyjuicing his friends. But why would he polyjuice himself as Madam Pince when she's going to be in the library herself and would shriek to high heaven on encountering her double? Also, her wonderful line, "Besmirched! Befouled! Desecrated!" (quoted from memory) doesn't sound like anything Draco would come up with. It perfectly expresses her outrage that someone would dare to write in a book (which, BTW, indicates that others besides Harry could see the marginal notes, whether or not they could read the cramped handwriting). (If we want polyjuiced Draco, I think Blaise Zabini lolling against a column in the Three Broomsticks is a better candidate.) I think the incident you're describing is an example of misleading the reader with a false but plausible explanation (HH think that Madam Pince made the noise but it was really Draco). JKR uses a similar tactic with Tonks: Hermione explains her depression as resulting from "survivor's guilt," but we later learn that she's in love with Lupin (who's rejecting her advances) and fearful for his safety. Also, Harry concludes that Mrs. Weasley wants Bill to transfer his affection from Fleur to Tonks when her comments on Tonks are really aimed at Lupin. And throughout the book, we're told that Dumbledore's reflexes aren't what they used to be (despite or because of the battle with LV) as a way of accounting for the dead hand injured by the curse on the ring Horcrux. (It seems to be a "natural" explanation agreed upon by Snape and Dumbledore that's also proposed by other characters, e.g. Slughorn, but it's false or at best misleading.) I'm sure there are many other examples of this tactic that I can't think of at the moment, not just in HBP but throughout the books. Most of the time, the true explanation is provided in the same book, as it is in the examples I've cited. But there are other instances where the explanation provided could still be proven false or incomplete. For example, Tonks says that she hears Snape yell something, Harry says that he yelled, "It's over" (which he did), but he could also have yelled "Petrificus Totalus!" and stopped Fenrir Greyback from killing Harry. (At any rate, we don't know who shouted the spell, but it couldn't have been Harry.) We also have Harry's explanation of Snape's reasons for switching sides, which we know to be false but do not yet have a true explanation for, and the Felix Felicis explanation for why Snape didn't kill Luna and Hermione, which doesn't work because Luna didn't take the potion. Anyway, I think we're all being hoodwinked by the evil JKR into accepting a large number of false explanations like the Draco/Madam Pince one. I'm just not sure which explanations are the false ones. Carol, who just remembered another example of this tactic, this one from OoP: "Kreacher, it transpired, had been hiding in the attic." Yet later we discover that Kreacher went to see Narcissa. Darn unreliable narrator! From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Fri May 19 20:48:39 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 20:48:39 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152519 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Pippin: > Would it? Wizards invented the Goblet of Fire, which seems to reflect a > moral philosophy very much like the one informing the old idea of marriage. Gerry ??????Even in 1926 there was no forced marriage. > Just as the Goblet chose the best person to compete in the contest regardless > of that person's desire to compete, God was supposed to choose the > best people to be married to one another. Gerry Even in 1926 there were reasons for a divorce. Adultary for example. Rich people even could get divorced in the 19th. century. So even then they recognized that God did not always do a perfect job. As interfering with the Goblet's > choice was taboo, so was interfering with marriage. Lack of desire > to compete did not invalidate the Goblet's choice, and lack of desire > to be married did not invalidate a marriage. Gerry Oh, that is why people got into hotels with another woman, made sure they were seen so they could get the divorce they wanted. If they had enough money of course, because I believe it was still rather expensive. So looking at it from that angle, Tom certainly was in the right social class for getting divorced. > > The marriage was made as soon as the partners gave free consent > in a recognized way...and the law in 1926 did not recognize persuasion by > means other than force as coercion. Again, Mufflre law. Wizarding law undoubtedly would. > Pippin: > "Again this is guesswork," said Dumbeldore,"but I believe that Merope, who was > deeply in love with her husband, could not bear to continue enslaving > him by magical means." --HBP ch 10 Gerry There is no time frame here. > > Pippin: > The exchange in chapter 5 where Molly explains why she thinks Bill > and Fleur have hurried into their engagement and should delay > reflects a view most people would have held in 1926. It also > may reflect JKR's own personal experience and her first disastrous > marriage. Gerry And Ginny immediately replies that Bill and Fleur are doing exactly the same as Molly and Arthyr did themselves. So, I'm sorry, but I don't think this very convincing. > > for very long. The potion made Tom desire someone whom he > never would have thought suitable without it. But did it produce > the urgency to consummate the relationship that (presumably) > made him rush into marriage? Or was that his own headstrong > nature? well, he was not married to Celia, which if he was the not waiting kind he would have been. Besides, it does not matter, unless you don't want to see he was drugged and keep looking for a way of blaming the victim. > > Ron becomes very eager to see Romilda, and Harry becomes reckless > under the spell of the Veela, but in both cases, they only seem reckless > to get their attention, not to possess them. Gerry \marriage is not about posession. And the first step when somebody is in love is wanting the other person to notice they exist. There is nothing that suggest that the effect would stop when the other person would notice them. But as it is a loive potion, that is very, very unlikely. I'm sorry, but I get the impression you try to twist canon to support your theory instead of seeing if your theory holds up in canon. > > I utterly agree with you that Merope took advantage of her husband- > to-be. I'm just pointing out that in 1926, the discovery of that would > not necesssarily have invalidated the marriage, even if a crime had > been committed in the process, Gerry And I pointed out that that was because society did not believe that possible. just as the discovery that Harry had > been forced to enter the contest through criminal activity did not invalidate > the goblet's choice. He was still bound by the contract. So was Tom. > So much for the good old days. Gerry Well here is some information about them which I found: Towards the end of the 19th century and the early 20th century, a number of bills were put forward in an attempt to further reform divorce legislation. The Hunter Bill, which attempted to extend the grounds for divorce was rejected by 71 votes to 40 while the Russell Bill, 1902, although also rejected became the precursor to the 1937 Matrimonial Causes Act. The first real sign of change in the 20th century became apparent with the passing of the 1923 Matrimonial Causes Act. This act adjusted the grounds of divorce so that women now had the same rights as men. According to Phillips this meant that the number of petitions filed by women rose above that of men for the first time. He states that between 1923 and 1939 50-60% of all divorce petitions were from women. This Act appears to have had a marked impact on the number of divorce petitions however; this rise can also be attributed to the change of law allowing women who would have normally just separated from their husbands to divorce them. http://www.swan.ac.uk/history/teaching/teaching%20resources/PlaguetoAids/2004presentationNew_Folder2/DivorceDelyth.htm I think this society would certainly have made legislation if they knew what magic could have done. > > Pippin > glad to find some reason for the goblet of fire besides a plot device Gerry, who thinks this is terribly far fetched > From leslie41 at yahoo.com Fri May 19 22:03:31 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 22:03:31 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152520 > > Leslie41: > > > > Again, fallacious reasoning. Just because someone does not put > > a stop to something, that doesn't mean they APPROVE of it. > Lupinlore: > Of course it does, IMO. Or, at the very least, it provides > presumptive evidence that they approve. And until JKR > specifically tells us otherwise, I say that the evidence against > DD is pretty solid in this regard. Indeed, the little indication > she has given us makes things look much, much worse for > the "epitome of goodness," not better. > Leslie41: Okay, for argument's sake I'll play it your way. But then, according to your reasoning the evidence against Lupin is rock solid as well, a point which you continue to ignore. According to your reasoning, as Lupin didn't put a stop to (or even question) the abominable actions of the Marauders against Snape, he also must "approve" of what they are doing, and must be held accountable as well. But of course, this is patently ridiculous. We know that Lupin does not approve, even though he doesn't put a stop to it or question it. (Or do you think that Lupin approves?) So how can you assume DD approves of Snape's nasty personality because HE does not intervene? And what of Black? If you insist that Rowling's work is trash if Snape is not punished, must not Sirius Black be postumously and publicly vilified as well, for his attempted murder of Snape, of which he did not repent? Must not Lupin be subjected to public criticism for his refusal to interfere? Or is it okay for students to torment each other to the point of public humiliation and possible death? I suspect that you don't want Lupin and Black subjected to scorn, no matter what they've done or failed to stop. I suspect that you have a blind spot when it comes to them, and an unreasonable bias against Snape. Eh, it's human. But it's not *logical* and *reasonable*. I also suspect you will be terribly disappointed in the end when Rowling does not accomodate your vision of how things should be. From celizwh at intergate.com Fri May 19 23:31:28 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 23:31:28 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152521 Steven1965aaa: > > ...is it possible that Prince went to Hogwarts > > at the same time as LV and Hagrid? If he knew her > > then, he would have known her as Prince. Ceridwen: > I have some trouble assigning Eileen Prince a > birthdate which would place her at Hogwarts at > the same time as Hagrid and Riddle. houyhnhnm: If Eileen was Voldemort's age, or a year or two younger, that would have made her no older than 33 when Snape was born. Not too old for a first child by RL standards and probably not in the WW either. With the exception of the Weasleys, they don't seem to be very prolific, and even Molly and Arthur must have been some years out of school when they started their family if they were at Hogwarts before Hagrid became groundskeeper. Eileen's plain appearance, along with the fact that she settled for a Muggle, make it not improbable that she married late. However, I had been taking it as established canon that Eileen Prince was at Hogwarts at the same time as Tom Riddle. I was thinking the date of the article about the Gobstones Club was mentioned in the text. After checking, I see that it wasn't. I guess the reasoning went like this: 1) The advanced potions textbook was "nearly fifty years old". 2) If Snape was using a second-hand textbook, it was probably his mother's. 3) Hence, his mother must have been a sixth or seventh year Hogwarts student nearly fifty years ago. Not necessarily. As you say, Eileen may have bought the book used any number of years after was published and handed it on to her son third-hand. Or it may never have been hers at all. Snape could have purchased his book second-hand in Diagon Alley as so many of the Weasley children have had to do. So you are right. There is no firm evidence as to Eileen Prince's birthdate. I don't think the presence of either Hagrid or McGonagall at Hogwarts in the '40s presents a problem to the theory, though. McGonagall was two years ahead of Tom so would have been more than two years ahead of Eileen. Eileen could have been in Hagrid's year, but if she was not a Gryffindor(Can you see her as a Gryffindor?) they may have had very little contact. After 35 odd years, I don't think I would recognize most of the people I sat in classes with let alone someone I had just passed in the hall. And if Tobias and Eileen Snape are being hidden at Hogwarts, it is very likely that they are under the protection of the Fidelius charm. No, if anybody recognizes Madam Pince as Eileen Prince Snape, it's going to be Hermione. From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sat May 20 02:09:47 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 02:09:47 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152522 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > And if Tobias and Eileen Snape are being hidden at Hogwarts, it is > very likely that they are under the protection of the Fidelius charm. > Steven1965aaa: Really a fascinating theory. Whatever deal Snape made would probably parallel the offer DD made to Draco on the tower, hide your parents / they can't be killed if they are "already dead". Snape's sacrifice (great personal risk) to save his mother would also reverse parallel (to some extent at least, since it's obviously not as great a sacrifice) Lily's sacrifice to save her son. And Pince/Prince is so close. It would be just like JPK to make a minor character like Madam Pince turn out to be important in the end. But I have a problem seeing Filch as someone who ever existed in the muggle world. Aside from the "magical" relationship with Mrs. Norris (I guess you could argue that a muggle could communicate with a magic cat, or that DD could have bewitched it, or some other explanation) he just seems so steeped in the magical world that I can't see him ever having lived outside of it. As I sit here I can't point to a specific incident that makes me feel this way (and maybe my view is colored by the movies) ...help anyone ? Anyway, if you were names Tobias Snape and had to assume a new name for your protection, would you chose "Argus Filch"? I mean, if you had to suffer "Tobias" for your entire life, would you really want to become "Argus"? From bawilson at citynet.net Sat May 20 02:17:24 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 22:17:24 -0400 Subject: Molly & Rita (was: Ginny/brothers/not old fashioned but old predjuces) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152524 katssirius wrote: "I was shocked back in GOF when Mrs. Weasley turns on Hermione because of Rita's stories. She knows Hermione, she knows Rita and the Prophet, she knows Harry, and she comes down on a 15 year old girl as the obvious one at fault without bothering to check it out first." Joe: "Does she know Rita? Is there any canon for that? For that matter does she know Hermione? I mean in the first three books how much time did Mrs. Weasley spend with Hermione?" BAW: Do the math! Molly's and Ritas' times at Hogwarts would have overlapped. Even if Rita were a Slytherin (she might have been a Ravenclaw, she's certainly not dumb--I can't see her as either a Gryffindor or a Huffelpuff), they would have known one another at least a little. Perhaps Rita had changed over the years. If in her student days Rita had been known to be a bit of a nosy-parker, annoying for that reason, but essentially truthful, Molly would have assumed that the girl she remembered was the same as the woman whose columns she was reading. BAW From kernsac at earthlink.net Sat May 20 03:22:05 2006 From: kernsac at earthlink.net (Peggy Kern) Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 20:22:05 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? References: Message-ID: <040f01c67bbc$92c30400$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> No: HPFGUIDX 152525 Angie said: So, if Snape is really DD's man, why didn't he kill LV then? Peggy now: I don't think anyone can kill Voldemort yet, because he has all the horcruxes. Peggy From celizwh at intergate.com Sat May 20 03:44:15 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 03:44:15 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152526 Carol responds: > That surprised me, too. Isn't there some reference, > somewhere, to Filch as "a failed wizard"? > especially if that father was abusive to him and > his mother. Also, if Filch were the man in Snape's > childhood memory, Harry would have recognized him > instantly. [...]There's no physical resemblance between > Snape and Filch. [...] > the description of Eileen Pince in her school photo > doesn't suggest that she had a hooked nose, either.) houyhnhnm: The "failed wizard" designation doesn't sound familiar to me. He is not so characterized anywhere in PS where he is introduced. Filch appears 5 times in that book. He is referred to as having pale eyes or lamplike eyes (or rather Mrs. Norris is described as having bulging lamplike eyes just like Filch's). He wheezes. That's about all the physical description for Filch that exists. His nose is never mentioned in PS, nor if I recall correctly, anywhere else in the books. Eileen is described as a "skinny girl of around fifteen. She was not pretty; she looked simultaneously cross and sullen, with heavy brows and a long, pallid face." She could have had any kind of nose from that description. Children frequently do not look like one parent. Sometimes they resemble neither closely. I can think of many examples in my own family. Carol: > More important, if Filch were a Muggle, he wouldn't > be able to see Hogwarts, nor would he long for the > old days when caretakers at Hogwarts used whips and > hung students by their wrists like medieval prisoners. > No, Filch seems to me to be part of the WW yet not > fully able to participate in it, houyhnhnm: Hogwarts is enchanted so that any strange passing Muggle cannot see it, but does that mean that no Muggle can ever set foot there--Muggles who have one foot in the WW already, such as Hermione's parents? We aren't told one way or the other, but as wizard-friendly Muggles can enter Diagon Alley, it makes sense to me that Muggles could also be allowed into Hogwarts under special circumstances and that somehow the enchantment would be lifted in their case. As for Filch's knowledge of the old punishments, he would have records going back before his time, and the chains and manacles are probably relics of his predecessor, too. Carol: > Nor would a Muggle have an almost psychic relationship > with a cat houyhnhnm: I have a psychic relationship with my cat and I'm a Muggle. Seriously, I don't see as much iron-clad evidence for Filch as a Severus parent, as I do for Madam Pince, but I like the theory because it opens up Filch's character so much, makes him so much more interesting and sympathetic. Maybe we got our interpretation of the memory Harry saw during the Occlumency lesson all wrong. Maybe there never was any abuse, just a couple of dissatisfied, cantankerous personalities in a mixed marriage. Tobias may have been a janitor or something similar in the Muggle world. He probably didn't have much in common with his bookish magical wife. But they rubbed along, looked out for each other in a mean world full of wrongdoers. I see their marriage as being similar in some ways to that of Vernon and Petunia. Except for the little tyke. I don't imagine Tobias knew what to make of his magical prodigy of a son. And it would have been difficult for Snape to look up to his Muggle father or see him as a role model. I expect they had a troublous relationship. We don't know how Eileen and Tobias met. There need not have been any deception involved. Obviously there are Muggles who have a tangential relationship with the Wizarding World. We know Muggle-born witches and wizards can have siblings who are non-magical. In extended families there must be Muggles who have knowledge of the existence of the Wizarding world without really knowing too much about it. Tobias may have known he was marrying a witch without having any real understanding of what he was getting himself into. So Tobias accepted his strange magical wife and son without understanding them or really knowing much about that world. He had his job, his buds that he met at the pub, sports probably. His stange son went off to magical boarding school and that undoubtedly relieved a lot of tension in the household. His world was routine, boring perhaps, but safe and predictable. Then his son gets mixed up with an Evil Dark Wizard, somehow displeases him, and he and Eileen are marked for death. Their only hope of escaping a horrible fate is to go into hiding at Hogwarts. No, Snape probably wouldn't want his Muggle father around, but they're dutiful, those Snapes. They don't have much use for people, but they have a strong sense of duty. Filch is dutiful towards Hogwarts. Madam Pince is dutiful toward the books for which she has the care. Imagine how hard it must have been for Tobias at first, stripped of his identity, wrenched from the world he's known all his life, and thrown into such an alien one. But he took it on. He's done his best to fit in, and he takes his duties as caretaker very seriously. He's kind of heroic, it seems to me, It's not surprising if, as the years went by, he began to wonder why he couldn't do magic, too. And Snape and Filch do seem to have a kind of intimacy even though Filch calls Snape "professor" and Snape calls Filch "Filch". Maybe they have to do so for safety's sake. I don't expect it bothers Snape very much. And who knows? Maybe Filch/Tobias is proud to have a son who is a "professor" I know! Snape the son of Argus Filch. It's not sexy. But it's poignant! :-D From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 20 04:12:37 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 04:12:37 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152527 "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Am I truly in a small minority of people who still really LIKES the > Potterverse? still guffaws at some of JKR's clever turns of phrase? > still marvels at her creativity? still shakes her head that this > writer can have us arguing after SIX books about whether a character > is evil, good, neither or both? Potioncat: 11:58 11:59 ..12:00 I can post again! The Harry Potter experience is so much fun. One of the best parts is that my 11 year old can read it and I can read it and we can both enjoy it on different levels. My 17-year old, who wouldn't read a book if his life depended on it, can at least discuss the story with me. Yeah, some of the "Wow" factor has worn off. We've gotten very familiar with the Wizarding World, so familiar that we've gotten critical of it. But, that's a different post. It was pretty cool to discover Snape would be DADA teacher, because we'd considered that hadn't we? JKR managed to toss a twist into it anyway both with the way Harry found out, and with so little DADA time shown.(We didn't expect that!) Finding out that DADA really does have a curse was exciting. What I'm really saying is that JKR still has something new to show us, some new twist to surprise us, a not quite what we expected detail here and there. I love re-reading the books and either coming upon a favorite line, or suddenly reading a line differently. There are at least 2 Divination jokes woven into serious conversations. In one of the books Harry is trying to choose a subject for the next year and Percy (Percy!) says something along the line of, "It's never too soon to start thinking about your future, so you should take Divination." In HBP, DD says something along the line of, "I hadn't foreseen how much trouble Divination would be, never having taken the subject myself." I love it! From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 20 04:22:29 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 00:22:29 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Molly & Rita (was: Ginny/brothers/not old fashioned but old predjuces) References: Message-ID: <008e01c67bc5$031ace60$fcb4400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152528 > > Joe: > "Does she know Rita? Is there any canon for that? For that matter does she > know Hermione? I mean in the first three books how much time did Mrs. > Weasley spend with Hermione?" > > > BAW: > Do the math! Molly's and Ritas' times at Hogwarts would have overlapped. > Even if Rita were a Slytherin (she might have been a Ravenclaw, she's > certainly not dumb--I can't see her as either a Gryffindor or a > Huffelpuff), they would have known one another at least a little. > > Perhaps Rita had changed over the years. If in her student days Rita had > been known to be a bit of a nosy-parker, annoying for that reason, but > essentially truthful, Molly would have assumed that the girl she > remembered was the same as the woman whose columns she was reading. Magpie: Doesn't Rita write unflattering articles that mention Arthur Weasley in the beginning of GoF? I thought Molly knew her as the author of those, which she complained about, but then she turned around and believed the other stuff about Hermione. -m From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 20 04:36:52 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 04:36:52 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch was Re: Why DD trust Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152529 > houyhnhnm:> > However, I had been taking it as established canon that Eileen Prince > was at Hogwarts at the same time as Tom Riddle. I was thinking the > date of the article about the Gobstones Club was mentioned in the > text. After checking, I see that it wasn't. I guess the reasoning > went like this: 1) The advanced potions textbook was "nearly fifty > years old". 2) If Snape was using a second-hand textbook, it was > probably his mother's. 3) Hence, his mother must have been a sixth > or seventh year Hogwarts student nearly fifty years ago. Potioncat: OK, you make a good point. We aren't really given a date for Eileen, just the idea that the book was published about 50 years ago. In fact, that information actually misleads us from the author of the spells. But, I do think JKR intended us to understand that the 50 year old book belonged to Eileen so here's the time line I came up with: Harry starts school in 91. HBP is set in school year 96/97 Fifty years ago is 46/47 Eileen looks 15 (50 years ago) so would have been born in 31/32 Riddle is listed in the Lexicon as 25/26. If she was born in 1931/32 she was around 28 or 29 when Snape was born. We aren't sure if he was born in Jan 1959 or Jan 1960. Potioncat, who wonders if anyone appreciates the irony of my working out timelines or birthdates! From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat May 20 06:34:49 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 06:34:49 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152530 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: Potioncat: > The Harry Potter experience is so much fun. One of the best parts is > that my 11 year old can read it and I can read it and we can both > enjoy it on different levels. My 17-year old, who wouldn't read a > book if his life depended on it, can at least discuss the story with > me. Geoff: This, I believe, is one of the factors which makes some "children's" books so engaging to all ages. Among my great favourites - which I must confess I read fo rthe first time at about the age of 23 - are the Winnie-the-Pooh books by A.A.Milne which are ostensibly for quite young children but can very definitely be read on two levels and can have adults howling with laughter at the subtle jokes while children look on blankly. I have always be highly amused by JKR's wordplays which are sometimes lost on young people and also will leave readers who are not native English speakers lost. Consider names such as Diagon Alley, Knockturn Alley, Hogwarts, Durmstrang, Grimmauld Place and Umbridge just to list a handful.... From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat May 20 06:50:56 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 06:50:56 -0000 Subject: Molly & Rita (was: Ginny/brothers/not old fashioned but old predjuces) In-Reply-To: <008e01c67bc5$031ace60$fcb4400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152531 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: Magpie: > Doesn't Rita write unflattering articles that mention Arthur Weasley in the > beginning of GoF? I thought Molly knew her as the author of those, which > she complained about, but then she turned around and believed the other > stuff about Hermione. Geoff: She doesn't actually mention him by name but he recognises the reference and she also obviously already has a reputation.... '...Bill handed his father the newspaper. Mr.Weasley scanned the front page while Percy looked over his shoulder. "I knew it," said Mr.Weasley heavily. "Ministry blunders... culprits not apprehended... lax security... Dark wizards running unchecked... national disgrace... Who wrote this? Ah... of course... Rita Skeeter." "That woman's got it in for the Ministry of Magic!" said Percy furiously. "Last week she was saying we're wasting our time quibbling about cauldron thickness, when we should be stamping out vampires!..."' (GOF "Mayhem at the Ministry" p.131 UK edition) ...interesting that Percy doesn't approve of her at this point in time... '"I'm mentioned," said Mr.Weasley, his eyes widening behind his glasses as he reached the bottom of the Daily Prophet article. "Where?" spluttered Mrs.Weasley, choking on her tea and whisky. "If I'd seen that, I'd have known you were alive!" "Not by name," said Mr.Weasley. "Listen to this: 'If the terrified wizards and witches who waited breathlessly for news at the edge of the wood expected reassurance from the Ministry of Magic, they were sadly disapppointed. A Ministry official emerged some time after the appearance of the Dark Mark, alleging that no one had been hurt but refusing to give any more information..."' (ibid. p.132) So, Molly obviously had enough information to distrust Rita Skeeter completely but still chose to believe what was being said about Hermione. A reading equivalent of selective deafness I think. From oppen at mycns.net Sat May 20 09:00:29 2006 From: oppen at mycns.net (ericoppen) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 09:00:29 -0000 Subject: ing The twins' attitude toward women Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152532 Could someone point me to canonical text showing that the twins have a particularly bad attitude toward women in general? I know that they commented that the person who had set the Lockhart books as texts for DADA had to be a witch---but, as nearly as I can tell, Lockhart is portrayed as the sort of man that women melt over but who leaves other men cold. Through Harry's eyes, we can see through him pretty quickly, but Hermione apparently is still all gooey about him for quite a while after he's already demonstrated his ineptitude. I don't remember the twins being particularly unusual, for teenage boys. What a lot of women don't understand or realize is that a lot of men (and teenage boys!) rather resent the power women can wield over them, and this can come out as some level of anger toward women in general. Kind of like how a lot of women have, on some level, a certain amount of anger at men. As long as the sexes have different, and not-always-compatible, OSes, this is going to happen to some extent. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 20 12:04:10 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 12:04:10 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152533 > Carol responds: > > > That surprised me, too. Isn't there some reference, > > somewhere, to Filch as "a failed wizard"? Potioncat: In HBP chapter 15, Hermione says: "...so it would be down to Filch to realize it wasn't a cough potion and he's not a very good wizard." Now, didn't Ron guess that Filch must be a Squib in CoS? Has that been confirmed, or is Hermione right? > houyhnhnm: > > I have a psychic relationship with my cat and I'm a Muggle. > > Seriously, I don't see as much iron-clad evidence for Filch as a > Severus parent, as I do for Madam Pince, but I like the theory because > it opens up Filch's character so much, makes him so much more > interesting and sympathetic. Potioncat: Filch was caretaker when the Marauders were students. So he didn't come to Hogwarts for protection (as Snape's father) In PoA ch14 Lupin says to Harry, "I happen to know this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch many years ago." IMO, that means that Filch took it away from the Marauders. There wouldn't be any reason for Snape's father to be at Hogwarts under an assumed name while Snape was a student. From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat May 20 13:26:25 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 09:26:25 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's Plot Message-ID: <386.32a4559.31a07301@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152534 In a message dated 5/19/2006 3:03:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: Like you, I've wondered about Snape's remark ("I think he expects me to do it in the end"). Clearly, as you say, he's left in the dark about Draco's plan for getting the DEs into Hogwarts and does not even know they're there until Flitwick tells him. He's very quiet and thoughtful as he says these words, as if he's not absolutely sure, but I think he's stating a real expectation (or a real fear, if he's DDM). -------------------------- Sherrie here: Or perhaps "he" doesn't refer to Voldemort at all? Granted, that's the immediate prior referent - but it's a general pronoun. What if it refers to Dumbledore? Being a firm believer in the coup de grace theory, I can certainly read it that way. Dumbledore has already been seriously (mortally?) injured by Slytherin's ring - Snape has (probably) already "stoppered death" for him. The "quiet and thoughtful" way Snape says this indicates to me that he expects to have to pull that stopper, as well I DON'T think they'd planned anything as dramatic as the scene on the tower, though - I think it was supposed to happen quietly, over the summer. Draco's bumblings just forced their hands. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sat May 20 13:41:27 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 13:41:27 -0000 Subject: Draco's Plot In-Reply-To: <386.32a4559.31a07301@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152535 Sherrie: > Or perhaps "he" doesn't refer to Voldemort at all? Granted, that's the immediate prior referent - but it's a general pronoun. What if it refers to Dumbledore? Being a firm believer in the coup de grace theory, I can certainly read it that way. Dumbledore has already been seriously (mortally?) injured by Slytherin's ring - Snape has (probably) already "stoppered death" for him. The "quiet and thoughtful" way Snape says this indicates to me that he expects to have to pull that stopper, as well Ceridwen: I've thought the same thing. Even when reading Spinner's End for the first time, the way Snape says this, as you mention, made me stop and wonder for a minute. Ceridwen. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 14:34:14 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:34:14 -0000 Subject: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152536 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > > > > > > The only reason I can come up with is that DD fears that Harry will > die if anyone but Harry kills LV. Perhaps DD believes this because of > the prophesy or the connection forged between Harry and LV by the > scar, or both? > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > Steven1965aaa: > > Well, the stated reason is that 1st you have to get rid of all the > horocuxes, then you go after Voldemort. If you "kill" him first, you > could then go after the horocruxes at your leisure. But even after > you got rid of all the horocruxes, there would still be 1 soul piece > left, the piece that was in VM when you "killed" him. He would not > be "vanquished". VM would again be floating around Albania or > somewhere, trying to possess rats and snakes. Eventually he'd come > back, albeit severely weakened by the destruction of his horocruxes. > Angie again: I certainly understand the "effiency" of killing his body last and that it will be much more dramatic to let him know right before he dies, "Hey, buddy, we destroyed all the other Horcrucxes." (Can't wait to read LV's reaction to that!) And if LV truly dies then, they will know for certain that what they thought were Horcruxes were indeed, Horcruxes (still haven't figured out how Harry's gonna know what a Horcrux is). But, geez Louise, given the death and destruction this wizard has wreaked, seems like they'd want to stop him or at least slow him down ASAP by any means possible. Like you said, they could "kill" his body and then look for the horcuxes, but I don't think it would be at their leisure. I think they would do it as quickly as possible, knowing that LV could come back at any time. I don't think the DEs would be so quick to scatter this time, since they know something like this happened before. This time, they'd probably be looking for him, so time would be of the essence. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 15:04:11 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 15:04:11 -0000 Subject: The Dome Effect in GOF Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152537 When Harry's wand locked with LV's wand in the graveyard, they produced a golden, dome shaped web that separated Harry and LV from the DEs. LV then orders the DEs to "do nothing." Several things I've never understood about this scene. First, was this "dome effect" part of the Priori Incantatem b/c Harry and LV? The effect itself was only described as "rare" and as forcing one of the wands to reveal the brother wand's prior spells. Nothing about any protective domes. Second, if this is part of the PI effect, was is unique to Harry and LV or would it have occurred b/w any two wizards whose wands came from the same phoenix? And by the same phoenix, I don't mean Fawkes, I just mean any "same" phoenix? Third, if the dome effect is not part of the PI spell, then what caused it? It's clearly related to Fawkes b/c Harry heard/felt the phoenix's song emanating from the dome. He felt the song inside of him, which he connected with DD, and felt as though a friend was whispering in his ear, "Don't break the connection." GOF, U.S softcover at 664. I tend to think that this was not a normal part of the PI effect, but was an additional effect that was only activated because the PI effect betweem Harry's wand and LV's wand was activated. It seems to be part of the "mysterious" protection that always seems to favor Harry, but what caused it? Perhaps something Ollivander did to the brother wand after he saw what Tom Riddle had become??? When Harry explains to DD and Sirius what happened in the graveyard and DD explains the PI to Harry, DD mentions nothing about the protective dome, which suggests that DD isn't surprised about it. Finally, could the DEs have done anything if LV had wanted them too? I don't think they could have, but I don't really have anything to support that, other than the protection of the dome would have been pretty futile of it could have been broken from the outside. Angie (wishing everyone a happy Saturday) From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 20 15:12:03 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 15:12:03 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152538 > > Pippin: > > Would it? Wizards invented the Goblet of Fire, which seems to reflect a > > moral philosophy very much like the one informing the old idea of > marriage. > > Gerry > ??????Even in 1926 there was no forced marriage. Pippin: We agree on that. Our problem is the 1926 definition of 'force'. Naturally they didn't allow for magic, and we don't know what they would have done if magic existed. But they did believe that women could make themselves irresistable by 'feminine wiles'. They could deceive and manipulate men's emotions with alcohol, perfume and flattery, just as they had been doing since Delilah's day. The discovery that a woman you thought you were in love with had done just that did not invalidate a marriage. > Gerry > Oh, that is why people got into hotels with another woman, made sure > they were seen so they could get the divorce they wanted. If they had > enough money of course, because I believe it was still rather > expensive. So looking at it from that angle, Tom certainly was in the > right social class for getting divorced. Pippin: ::raises eyebrow:: You're telling me Tom was hard done by because he had no opportunity to frame his wife for adultery? Pippin: > > The marriage was made as soon as the partners gave free consent > > in a recognized way...and the law in 1926 did not recognize > persuasion by > > means other than force as coercion. Gerry: > Again, Mufflre law. Wizarding law undoubtedly would. Pippin: Undoubtedly? Fridwulfa seems to have deserted her husband. We have no idea what wizard family law is like or even if there is any. In any case, I doubt the wizengamot would have taken over the financial responsibility for Merope and baby Tom if they could get the gold from Tom Sr. They'd have a case against Merope for causing harm and distress to a Muggle, but I don't know that they'd have invalidated the marriage because she used a love potion. They seem to be in pretty common use if Fred and George can sell them openly. And of course they've got no problems with slavery, unfortunately. > > Pippin: > > "Again this is guesswork," said Dumbeldore,"but I believe that > Merope, who was deeply in love with her husband, could not bear to continue enslaving him by magical means." --HBP ch 10 > > Gerry > There is no time frame here. Pippin: "You see, within a few months of their runaway marriage, Tom Riddle reappeared at the manor house in Little Hangleton without his wife." > > > > > Pippin: > > The exchange in chapter 5 where Molly explains why she thinks Bill > > and Fleur have hurried into their engagement and should delay > > reflects a view most people would have held in 1926. It also > > may reflect JKR's own personal experience and her first disastrous > > marriage. > > Gerry > And Ginny immediately replies that Bill and Fleur are doing exactly > the same as Molly and Arthyr did themselves. So, I'm sorry, but I > don't think this very convincing. Pippin: Molly does not point out, though she might have, that she and Arthur had known each other for seven years or so at Hogwarts. It's true that divorce was liberalized in 1923. Women no longer had to prove aggravated adultery -- that is, they didn't have to prove that their husbands had been cruel as well as unfaithful. I'm not sure what that has to do with this, since no infidelity has been alleged. People were still very sure that allowing people to divorce because they were unhappy or had made a mistake would impugn the sanctity of marriage and be the ruin of the country. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 20 15:20:11 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 15:20:11 -0000 Subject: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152539 > Angie again: > But, geez Louise, given the death and destruction this wizard has > wreaked, seems like they'd want to stop him or at least slow him down > ASAP by any means possible. Like you said, they could "kill" his > body and then look for the horcuxes, but I don't think it would be at > their leisure. I think they would do it as quickly as possible, > knowing that LV could come back at any time. I don't think the DEs > would be so quick to scatter this time, since they know something > like this happened before. This time, they'd probably be looking for > him, so time would be of the essence. Pippin: I think it might have to do with Dumbledore's famous 'gleam' in GoF. Evidently Voldemort overlooked something important when he used Harry's blood to reconstruct his body. A new body might not have whatever weakness Dumbledore perceived. Pippin From inufan_625 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 07:07:53 2006 From: inufan_625 at yahoo.com (inufan_625) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 07:07:53 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152540 Geoff: This, I believe, is one of the factors which makes some "children's" books so engaging to all ages. I have always be highly amused by JKR's wordplays which are sometimes lost on young people and also will leave readers who are not native English speakers lost. Consider names such as Diagon Alley, Knockturn Alley, Hogwarts, Durmstrang, Grimmauld Place and Umbridge just to list a handful.... Inufan_625: This caught my eyes as it was mentioned by another poster...something about being embarassed about not getting the joke with Knockturn Alley for so many reads. I guess I should be supremely embarassed then because I still don't get it. I know that JKR choses her names carefully using a variety of sources to put meaning behind her choices (mythology, history, ect.), but I feel like I am missing something, especially pertaining to the above examples. I would appreciate it if someone would feel this clueless reader in. I have no excuse as I am a native speaker and not all that young...lol From hexicon at yahoo.com Sat May 20 17:06:38 2006 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 17:06:38 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape / JKR's men (was:Re: What's fun about the HPs?...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152541 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" wrote: > > Ceridwen: > I liked, or at least was favorably inclined toward Snape, before I > ever saw the films. I love the 'Spock Effect' comment, it just might > be true. But, maybe there's another twisted, tortured soul with a > big nose even farther back: Sherlock Holmes. I think both Snape and > Spock trade on the same sorts of feelings from readers as Sherlock. > And, hey, they all have names beginning with the letter 'S'! > > I think that a certain segment of the population do 'go gaga over > emotionally repressed men with tons of baggage'. SNIP Sometimes not the nicest, but aside from Voldemort, I > don't think there is a single all-good or all-bad character in the > series. Which is very much like life. > > Ceridwen. I'll add my own fictional "S" comparison to the mix, and that is Spike from the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" TV series. Like Snape, Spike is a wonderfully ambiguous character. In the early part of the series, he is capable of great evil, yet he dotes on Drusilla and makes great sacrifices to protect her. Spike's "I might be love's bitch, but at least I'm man enough to admit it" contrasts interestingly with Snape's "Fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves" speech. If, like me, you're a fan of LOLLIPOPS, you know where this is going . . . We've had just enough hints to allow some of us to imagine what Snape risked for love. It's this ambiguity that keep me fascinated with Snape. Post-HBP, Sirius and Remus don't have this complexity, although I agree with Pippin that the ESELupin would restore the intrigue for Remus. (Sirius is the kind of person I'd find quite irritating in real life, and I'd always been rooting for a Siris-Remus subtext to give SB a few additional layers.) While I haven't quite got past the greasy hair to "sexy," I certainly find Snape to be the most compelling character in the series. From estesrandy at yahoo.com Sat May 20 17:14:40 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 17:14:40 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152542 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inufan_625" wrote: > > Geoff: > This, I believe, is one of the factors which makes some "children's" > books so engaging to all ages. > > I have always be highly amused by JKR's wordplays which are sometimes > lost on young people and also will leave readers who are not native > English speakers lost. > > Consider names such as Diagon Alley, Knockturn Alley, Hogwarts, > Durmstrang, Grimmauld Place and Umbridge just to list a handful.... > > > > Inufan_625: > > This caught my eyes as it was mentioned by another poster...something > about being embarassed about not getting the joke with Knockturn Alley > for so many reads. > > I guess I should be supremely embarassed then because I still don't > get it. I know that JKR choses her names carefully using a variety of > sources to put meaning behind her choices (mythology, history, ect.), > but I feel like I am missing something, especially pertaining to the > above examples. > > I would appreciate it if someone would feel this clueless reader in. I > have no excuse as I am a native speaker and not all that young...lol > Are you asking for deaper meaning than just the puns that she loves to use? Like Grimmauld Place is a grim old place? Knockturn Alley is a place that people might visit nocturnally (at night)? Randy From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Sat May 20 17:30:28 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 13:30:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060520173028.97291.qmail@web37215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152543 Geoff: I have always be highly amused by JKR's wordplays which are sometimes lost on young people and also will leave readers who are not native English speakers lost. Consider names such as Diagon Alley, Knockturn Alley, Hogwarts, Durmstrang, Grimmauld Place and Umbridge just to list a handful.... Inufan_625: This caught my eyes as it was mentioned by another poster...something about being embarassed about not getting the joke with Knockturn Alley for so many reads. Catherine now: Don't be embarrassed, or at least we can be embarrassed together! I never even noticed the word play on any of those names until this list just mentioned them, and even then I had to really read it and think about it....sigh... Knockturn Alley = nocturnally Diagon Alley = diagonally Grimauld Place = grim old place Don't get what's meant for word play on Durmstrang or Hogwarts. So if anyone can enlighten us less-than-attentive readers on those ones, I'd appreciate it, for one! Catherine (who really has to sleep more before my brain melts away completely!) --------------------------------- The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new Yahoo! Mail. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From estesrandy at yahoo.com Sat May 20 17:55:25 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 17:55:25 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152544 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > > > The Harry Potter experience is so much fun. One of the best parts is > > that my 11 year old can read it and I can read it and we can both > > enjoy it on different levels. My 17-year old, who wouldn't read a > > book if his life depended on it, can at least discuss the story with > > me. > > Geoff: > This, I believe, is one of the factors which makes some "children's" books > so engaging to all ages. > > Among my great favourites - which I must confess I read fo rthe first > time at about the age of 23 - are the Winnie-the-Pooh books by > A.A.Milne which are ostensibly for quite young children but can very > definitely be read on two levels and can have adults howling with > laughter at the subtle jokes while children look on blankly. > > I have always be highly amused by JKR's wordplays which are sometimes > lost on young people and also will leave readers who are not native > English speakers lost. > > Consider names such as Diagon Alley, Knockturn Alley, Hogwarts, > Durmstrang, Grimmauld Place and Umbridge just to list a handful.... > Speaking of playing with words and phrases.... I really love the way JKR takes a well known phrase and turns it into an actual event in the books. Here are some examples... 1. The basilisk causes people to turn to stone. They are scared stiff. 2. Professor Umbridge starts issuing proclamations left and right and then she takes over. She gets carried away. Later the Centaurs literally carry her away. 3. Quirrell turns out to be lying about himself. He is two faced and has a face in the back of his head. 4. Professor Lockhart's plan to take credit and blame others backfires on him at the end. This actually happens when Ron's wand backfires on Lockhart. 5. Professor Moody is literally the teacher who has eyes in the back of his head. 6. I used to hear my father say "if he could bottle someone else's luck then things would turn out better." In HBP we have bottled luck. 7. In a less humurous fashion, I have heard that depression sucks the life out of someone. Dementors suck the soul out of their victims. 8. The often used phrase "If I could turn back time" comes to mind. JKR invents the time turner. 9. When Lucius Malfoy was furious with the outcome in Chamber of Secrets, I am sure that he was getting tired of Harry and Dumbledore's lectures about people doing Voldemort's evil deeds. He probably wanted to tell them to "put a sock in it!" I am sure he did not intend for Harry to put a sock in the diary! 10. Of course, who could forget how Sirius Black slipped "beyond the veil". These are the kinds of word plays that have made Harry Potter a joy for me to read to my kids and myself over the last 6 years. Randy 10. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat May 20 18:17:43 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 18:17:43 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: <20060520173028.97291.qmail@web37215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152545 > Catherine now: > > Don't get what's meant for word play on Durmstrang or Hogwarts. So if anyone can enlighten us less-than-attentive readers on those ones, I'd appreciate it, for one! Hickengruendler: I don't know about Hogwarts, but Durmstrang is a word play for "Sturm und Drang" ("Storm and Stress"). "Sturm und Drang" is the name of a German literature epoche from the second half of the 18th century (named after a drama by the today rather unknown author Friedrich Klinger). The most famous works from that epoche are all dramas, and they often feature a dark and moody young hero, not unlike Viktor Krum, who rebels against an authority figure. From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 20 18:23:20 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:23:20 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? References: <20060520173028.97291.qmail@web37215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005401c67c3a$79fe1580$9998400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152546 > Catherine > Don't get what's meant for word play on Durmstrang or Hogwarts. So if > anyone can enlighten us less-than-attentive readers on those ones, I'd > appreciate it, for one! Magpie: Hogwarts=Wart Hog Durmstrang=Sturm und Drang/Storm and Stress. It's associated with an 18the century German romantic literary tradition. -m From estesrandy at yahoo.com Sat May 20 18:25:44 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 18:25:44 -0000 Subject: What did Neville Forget? (was Re: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort?) In-Reply-To: <040f01c67bbc$92c30400$6401a8c0@user2b3ff76354> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152547 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy Kern" wrote: > > Angie said: So, if Snape is really DD's man, why didn't he kill > LV then? > > Peggy now: I don't think anyone can kill Voldemort yet, because he has all > the horcruxes. > > Peggy > "That's it!" he yells and the boy behind the toy piano does a backflip. What if the reason why Bellatrix was sent to the Longbottoms was to fetch a horcrux that the Longbottoms had! The thing that Neville cannot remember is the actual horcrux that his parent's had. What if his mommy was trying to tell him something at St. Mungos. This could be the last horcrux found in book seven. This would allow Neville to provide the last bit of help that Harry needs to defeat Voldemort. This would parallel the storyline in book one when Neville gives Gryffindor the last few points that they need to win the house cup! What do you guys think? Red Eye Randy From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Sat May 20 18:27:18 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:27:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: <005401c67c3a$79fe1580$9998400c@Spot> Message-ID: <20060520182718.97366.qmail@web37202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152548 > Catherine > Don't get what's meant for word play on Durmstrang or Hogwarts. So if > anyone can enlighten us less-than-attentive readers on those ones, I'd > appreciate it, for one! Magpie: Hogwarts=Wart Hog Durmstrang=Sturm und Drang/Storm and Stress. It's associated with an 18the century German romantic literary tradition. -m Catherine again: Oh, I got the Wart Hog thing, I thought maybe it was something else that I had missed. Thanks, I had no idea about Durmstrang, that's really interesting. JKR is a very well-ead lady! Catherine --------------------------------- Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 19:07:02 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 19:07:02 -0000 Subject: Argus Filch as Tobias Snape? (Was: Pince/Filch) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152549 Carol earlier: > > > That surprised me, too. Isn't there some reference, somewhere, to Filch as "a failed wizard"? > Potioncat responded: > In HBP chapter 15, Hermione says: "...so it would be down to Filch to realize it wasn't a cough potion and he's not a very good wizard." Carol again: I know. That's the passage that surprised me. I, um, just did the chapter summary for chapter 15. :-) But I meant a different reference in some other book that specifically uses the phrase "failed wizard." I'm sure I've read that exact phrase somewhere in the books in reference to Filch, but I can't recall where. I thought it was interesting that a self-confessed Squib would be referred to in those terms, not just by Hermione but in that other reference, assuming that it exists. (Harry wonders when he sees the Kwikspell course if it means that Filch "isn't a proper wizard," CoS Am. ed. 128, but I don't think that's the reference I'm looking for.) > Potioncat: > Now, didn't Ron guess that Filch must be a Squib in CoS? Has that been confirmed, or is Hermione right? Carol: This information is provided by Squib himself--sorry! Filch himself after Mrs. Norris is found Petrified: ". . . He [Harry] knows I'm a--I'm a--He knows I'm a Squib!" Harry retorts that he doesn't even know what a Squib is and Filch answers, "Rubbish! He saw my Kwikspell letter!" (142). And it's confirmed on JKR's website in her discussion of Squibs on the Extra Stuff page, which I won't quote here, though the notable thing to me is the pathos of Filch's and Mrs. Figg's situation (however we may feel about Filch himself)--born to wizarding parents, familiar with the wizarding world, yet unable to do magic. Still, though, they can use magical artifacts and communicate with cats, so they're rather different from wizards. As for Hermione being right about Filch not being a very good wizard, maybe a Squib has a very low level of magic rather than no magic at all like a Muggle. (Ron at age eleven may be wrong that "a Squib hasn't got *any* magic powers," CoS 145.) Squibs' powers may not be wholly absent but, rather, extremely weak and normally limited ways to such things as the ability to see magical places and communicate with magical animals. Mrs. Figg says that she "stationed [her cat] Mr. Tibbles under a car . . . and Mr. Tibbles came and warned [her]," OoP Am. ed. 20, just as Mrs. Norris reports to Filch, acting as his "deputy" (CoS, page ref. lost). Both Filch and Figgy are in tune with the magical world even if they can't use a wand, in marked contrast to, say, Petunia, who knows about the WW but can never be part of it (and perhaps hates and fears it partly for that reason). > Potioncat: > Filch was caretaker when the Marauders were students. So he didn't come to Hogwarts for protection (as Snape's father). In PoA ch14 Lupin says to Harry, "I happen to know this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch many years ago." IMO, that means that Filch took it away from the Marauders. There wouldn't be any reason for Snape's father to be at Hogwarts under an assumed name while Snape was a student. Carol: Yes. I made the same point to houyhnhnm offlist, though I was thinking of Filch's detention records in HBP rather than the Marauder's Map. Either way, though, it's clear that Filch's job, and his name, with all its mythological implications, predate Severus's decision to join the Death Eaters and therefore any need for his parents to be protected from Voldemort. BTW, houyhnhnm, I ran across a description of Filch's nose, which is not hooked like Snape's but "bulbous" (CoS 126). Not that the lack of physical resemblance proves anything in itself, but unless he's been permanently transfigured, Filch is clearly not the hook-nosed man in the memory from Snape's childhood (whom Harry, perhaps mistakenly, identifies as little Severus's father). I do think that, like many of the employees at Hogwarts, including Trelawney, Slughorn, Hagrid, and Snape himself, Filch is under Dumbledore's protection, but this protection has nothing to do with his being Severus's father since, IMO, the chronology and the comments on JKR's site together pretty much rule out any such relationship. The case for Madam Pince as Snape's mother is IMO a bit more solid but seems to depend solely on the coincidence of a name, a hooked nose, and a cantankerous disposition. (If she's Snape's mother, she certainly failed to teach him not to write in books!) If there's any additional canon evidence for the Pince/Prince connection, I'd be interested in reading it. However, I would personally prefer that Dumbledore's faith in Snape be based on something that Snape himself has done which proves his loyalty to Dumbledore beyond doubt and relates more directly to Harry. Carol, irrelevantly noting that Ginny's distraught reaction to Colin Creevey's petrification is "explained" by the fact that Colin sat next to her in Charms (CoS 185) and on the alert for other misleading explanations throughout the books From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sat May 20 19:36:44 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 12:36:44 -0700 Subject: Hagrid and Dumbledore: was Hags and "hag-rid" Message-ID: <700201d40605201236o28f19830n729c31c84b8ae3ed@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152550 On 5/18/06, justcarol67 wrote: > > We've been told by the Lexicon that "Hagrid" (cf. "haggard") means > what it appears to mean, "ridden by hags," and that it's an old name > for sleep paralysis ("the sensation of being held immobile in bed") > ...snip...Since JKR invented Hagrid very early in the series,... I'm > certain that she had a private little laugh imagining the gigantic > Hagrid "ridden" by hags (in a nonsexual way), one of her many little > plays on words (cf. the "griffin door" knocker and the names of the > various textbook authors). Note that she has softened (bowdlerized, > Kemper?) hags as well, from the evil creatures who eat children in the > Grimms' fairy tales (anyone know whether the witch is called a hag in > the original German?) to ugly old women who eat raw liver. (Sanguini > the Vampire seems equally harmless though I'm unsure why she's > bowdlerized Vampires in a book where evil creatures are starting to > appear, unless, again, it's to eliminate the sexual connotations.) > > ... > > Carol, not sure that any of this contributes to our understanding of > the books but interested in the ways in which JKR adapts traditional > materials and plays with language > Kemper now: Not only did JKR bowdlerize the (half)giant, which was done earlier by Golding in *The Princess Bride*, but she sets him up as the first person in the series who the reader immediately can trust. This is not only done by the action of him riding across the British skies but by Dumbledore's words. The seeds are sown as early as the "The Boy Who Lived" but as of "The White Tomb" the text has not been ripe for the reaping. >From "The Boy Who Lived", Dumbledore: Hagrid's bringing him. McGonagall: You think it -- /wise/ -- to trust Hagrid with something as important as this? (emphasis JKR's) Dumbledore: I would trust Hagrid with my life. >From "The White Tomb", [Hagrid] was crying quite silently, his face gleaming with tears, and in his arms, wrapped in purple velvet spangled with golden stars, was what Harry knew to be Dumbledore's body. ...and... They could not see clearly what happening at the front. Hagrid seemed to have placed the body carefully upon the table. Along with the suspicious AK on the tower, I suspect that Hagrid will play an integral part in reviving, if not resurrecting, Dumbledore. There have been questions as to why JKR would allow DD to be alive with regards to story. As, a writer, she seems more a mystery writer with a fantasy backdrop. We have had our fair share of red herrings, but we haven't seen Agatha Christie's 5th Little Indian from *And Then There Were None* played out. Harry already has 'Death is Final' lesson with Sirius but staring with Cedric. I'm playing with the idea that DD is alive, obviously, and am encouraging others to look at the possibility of it. Harry doesn't need to know the truth of it until after vanquishing the Dark Lord. The Tower scene doesn't need to be an intricate plot between Snape and DD. It could be a quick conversation: DD: Hey, Severus, if push comes to shove and you're in position where you're expected to kill me. Fake it. Snape: But, Headmaster, if that happens, I probably would have to leave the scene quickly. DD: That's ok. I've left instructions what is to happen to my body upon my death. Hagrid will follow my instructions explicitly. Snape: You think it --/wise/-- to trust Hagrid with something as important as that? DD: I trust Hagrid with my life. Harry can learn about DD after he vanquishes the Dark Lord, much like Frodo learned of Gandalf's return after the destruction of the One Ring. This leaves Harry alone to face the Dark Lord and be the Hero of the series: not DD and not Snape. -Kemper, winking at Carol and awaiting the onslaught of boos and hisses from the Snapehaters and naysayers (many of whose posts I enjoy reading, wink) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Sat May 20 20:02:54 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 20:02:54 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152551 Potioncat: > In PoA ch14 Lupin says to Harry, "I happen > to know this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch > many years ago." houyhnhnm: Aw, shute! I guess that's that, then. Eileen must just be drawn to men without magical powers. Maybe, like Margaret Smith, she likes a man she can take. Unless, unless ... Lupin says the map was confiscated by Mr. Filch. He doesn't say from whom or *how* many years ago. :-) It does make me wonder what is the story of the map. How did Filch come to confiscate it? Was Dumbledore aware of its existence? Why wasn't it destroyed? From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sat May 20 20:03:25 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 20:03:25 -0000 Subject: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152552 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > But, geez Louise, given the death and destruction this wizard has > wreaked, seems like they'd want to stop him or at least slow him down > ASAP by any means possible. STeven1965aaa: Yea, makes sense. Would go with what DD said at the end of SS about keeping evil at bay. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sat May 20 20:21:43 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 20:21:43 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152553 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inufan_625" wrote: > > Geoff: > This, I believe, is one of the factors which makes some "children's" > books so engaging to all ages. > > I have always be highly amused by JKR's wordplays which are sometimes > lost on young people and also will leave readers who are not native > English speakers lost. > > Consider names such as Diagon Alley, Knockturn Alley, Hogwarts, > Durmstrang, Grimmauld Place and Umbridge just to list a handful.... Inufan_625: > This caught my eyes as it was mentioned by another poster...something > about being embarassed about not getting the joke with Knockturn Alley > for so many reads. > > I guess I should be supremely embarassed then because I still don't > get it. I know that JKR choses her names carefully using a variety of > sources to put meaning behind her choices (mythology, history, ect.), > but I feel like I am missing something, especially pertaining to the > above examples. > > I would appreciate it if someone would feel this clueless reader in. I > have no excuse as I am a native speaker and not all that young...lol Geoff: I may be repeating some answers, but I am posting the text of an off-group email reply I sent today to someone making a similar enquiry: Thanks for your email. Can I say first that I'm never sure where a fellow group member is living so I don't know whether English is their first language or not so I apologise if I'm "teaching my grandmother to suck eggs". Knockturn Alley, as I think you see, is a play on "nocturnally" which means to do with the night and this street has a lot to do with Dark magic, so it has been suggested that this was behind JKR's play on words. Similarly, Diagon Alley is a play on "diagonally" and I have seen the idea that JKR is suggesting that the Wizarding World is diametrically opposite to the real world, if you see her line of thought. Grimmauld Place (Grim Old Place) is a tip of the hat to the fact she lives in Edinburgh. In Scots dialect, "auld" = "old" and Edinburgh has the very old nickname of "Auld Reekie" = "Old Smelly" The others I mentioned. "Umbridge" is a play on the English word "umbrage". To "take umbrage" means to "take offence", to "get annoyed". If someone was to say something rude about me, I could easily "take umbrage". Professor U. is someone who easily gets annoyed if her wishes are not obeyed to the letter... In English, there is a wordplay called "spoonerising", named after an Oxford professor who tended to do it accidentally. What happens is that the first letter or letters of two adjacent words are tranposed usually to humorous effect. By way of example, Spooner is reputed to have turned a toast of "bless our dear Queen" into "bless our queer Dean". In Germany in the 19th century, there was an artistic and literary movement expressing emotional unrest called "Sturm und Drang" (storm and stress) to which Beethoven contributed. JKR has spoonerised this to "Durmstrang. Finallly Hogwarts. This is got by playing around with "warthog" which is an African wild pig. Hope this helps From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 20 20:38:47 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 16:38:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? References: <20060520182718.97366.qmail@web37202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <007c01c67c4d$6593d130$9998400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152554 > Magpie: > Hogwarts=Wart Hog > > Durmstrang=Sturm und Drang/Storm and Stress. > > It's associated with an 18the century German romantic literary tradition. > Catherine again: > Oh, I got the Wart Hog thing, I thought maybe it was something else that > I had missed. Thanks, I had no idea about Durmstrang, that's really > interesting. JKR is a very well-ead lady! Magpie: Oh, I don't think there is a connection to the school. It just sounds funny, is my guess, for the hog connection, which is also connected to Hogsmeade. The area may have originally been associated with pigs. As an aside, Swineherds were often associated with madness and therefore sort of Shamanistic visions. Merlin in some legends was mad for a time, and I think also tended pigs. Then of course there's the winged boars outside the school suggesting "when pigs fly." -m From mjf152 at yahoo.co.uk Sat May 20 16:38:59 2006 From: mjf152 at yahoo.co.uk (Maureen Frew) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 17:38:59 +0100 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <446F4623.6090708@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 152555 > Inufan_625: > This caught my eyes as it was mentioned by another poster... > something about being embarassed about not getting the joke > with Knockturn Alley for so many reads. > > I guess I should be supremely embarassed then because I still > don't get it. Well, Knockturn Alley sounds like nocturnally - at night time. And the kind of shops that seem to be there are associated with dark, and things that are hidden. Or maybe carried out in the dead of night! I didn't catch Diagon Alley until I heard a clip of one of the audio books, I think sometimes they work better out loud! Maureen From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Sat May 20 16:50:45 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 16:50:45 -0000 Subject: Snape's Songlike Chant (Snape's Song: revised) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152556 I was thinking about the part in HBP where Snape "...muttered an incantation that sounded almost like a song.(HBP US version, pg. 523)" after the Sectumsempra that Harry performed. This reminded me a lot of Fawkes and his song, as well as his tears. Does anyone think there is a connection between Fawkes and Snape? I just felt like this songlike incantation was not a conventional wizard healing method, otherwise we'd find Madame Pomfrey singing incantations as well as healing. I haven't noticed that any other spell, incantation, etc. was ever described as song-like, so it made me feel there was more to it, considering the many posts about Snape's patronus being a phoenix and so on. Just a thought. Najwa PS I'd like to thank the house elf that inspired me to rewrite it and add more support to my point. :) From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Sat May 20 18:19:40 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 18:19:40 -0000 Subject: An army of Voldemort/ was: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152557 > Pippin wrote: > I think it might have to do with Dumbledore's famous 'gleam' in > GoF. Evidently Voldemort overlooked something important when he > used Harry's blood to reconstruct his body. A new body might not > have whatever weakness Dumbledore perceived. If the horcruxes are fragmented souls, and Voldemort had to go through all that fuss and trouble to get Harry to the graveyard and so forth in order to create his new body, then I don't see it being so easy for him to do this many times, especially since he wanted to kill Harry that night. I'm sure he has enemies other than Harry, but still, it would not be a simple task. I think one thing Voldemort should have thought of is putting his enemies in the hospital and then withdrawing their blood "unwillingly" and just keep them in stores for his horcruxes. All this fuss is just silly in my humble opinion. Perhaps maybe he should just create spare bodies and hang them in his closet or even create an army of himself! If one Voldemort is bad imagine 6 or seven spread across the world! I'm just adding a point on how Voldemort is weak in the mind. He just doesn't think right in my opinion. As for Dumbledore's gleam, I hope it's that Harry's blood works as a poison of love of some sort. I really wish that Merope would come back and just love her son to the point of death, literally. Or at least show him love and lure him into the veil. However we know that Harry will be his death, so I don't see how that would work, unless Harry lures him to his mom and his death. I have babbled enough. Najwa From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Sat May 20 18:22:50 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 18:22:50 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152558 > > Catherine now: > > Don't get what's meant for word play on Durmstrang or Hogwarts. > Hickengruendler: > I don't know about Hogwarts, but Durmstrang is a word play > for "Sturm und Drang" ("Storm and Stress"). Najwa now: Hogwarts is a flower isn't it? How could it be word play unless someone means by the school representing abnormal growths on pigs? I don't get the wordplay there, and come to think of it, I don't see why a school should be named after a flower unless there is some deep meaning behind that flower, which I'm sure someone will tell me that there is. Sorry, I'm horrible at Herbology. From bawilson at citynet.net Sat May 20 18:36:22 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:36:22 -0400 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152559 Leslie141: "And I would say when we judge his teaching style, we should consider the fact that Snape's students learn an awful lot as a result of his nastiness." Lupinlore: "Which is, once again IMO, absolutely and totally irrelevant. The ends do not justify the means, particularly with regard to the abuse of children. If JKR tries to pull the "it was okay because they learn important lessons" card, I would say she has failed utterly and reprehensibly, as DD has failed utterly and reprehensibly, by approving of the abuse of children." BAW: And where in canon do we see Snape abusing children? I've read the books several times, and I can't see it. He is mean, nasty, and rude--but mean, nasty, and rude do not in themselves constitute abuse. Umbridge, yes--she's definitely an abuser; Snape, as unpleasant as he is, is not. I've seen real abuse, and nothing that Snape does comes anywhere close. And, for all his flaws, Snape's students LEARN. Those who aren't complete morons like Crabbe and Goyle at least pass their OWLS--maybe not with O's or E's, but at least A's; I think that Neville even managed to scrape an A. (Haven't the book handy.) In another post, I mentioned that I had a rather Snape-like teacher; one of his catchphrases was "Teaching is not a popularity contest." I also had teachers who were as sweet as pie, but couldn't teach their way out of a wet paper bag. Which would you want, for yourself or your child--a mean but effective teacher, or a sweet but incompetent one? Assuredly the former. (Ideally you'd want one who was nice AND effective, but we can't get everything we want in this world, can we? And that's another life lesson.) School is supposed to be preparation for life, and in life we meet unpleasant people, sometimes in positions of authority, and we have to learn how to get along with them. BAW From dougsamu at golden.net Sat May 20 19:32:48 2006 From: dougsamu at golden.net (doug rogers) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 15:32:48 -0400 Subject: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: <1148096366.1575.7267.m34@yahoogroups.com> References: <1148096366.1575.7267.m34@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <44A1290C-5FA4-4D53-B94D-87ACA5AA8795@golden.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152560 > Steven1965aaa: > > If you "kill" him first, you could then go after the horcruxes > at your leisure. But even after you got rid of all the horcruxes, > there would still be 1 soul piece left, the piece that was in VM > when you "killed" him. He would not be "vanquished". doug rogers: Well... no..... If the horcruxes are anchors so the main soul doesn't pass on, like the tethers to a hot air balloon, or multiple anchors on a ship, once the horcruxes are destroyed the main soul has no anchor, unless it has found a body to be in, to act as a horcrux, but as you say: > VM would again be floating around Albania or > somewhere, trying to possess rats and snakes. Eventually he'd come > back, albeit severely weakened by the destruction of his horocruxes. Embodied, the soul is earthbound. Disembodied, the soul passes on. Once the body that that soul inhabits dies the soul moves on. Admittedly, the timing would be dicey on behalf of both parties. Voldysoul would likely pass on as soon as he left a body to inhabit another. No one, no one is here. We stand in the Atlantic. We become panoramic. ____________________ From katbofaye at aol.com Sat May 20 19:37:02 2006 From: katbofaye at aol.com (katssirius) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 19:37:02 -0000 Subject: 'Filch is failed wizard' quote Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152561 POA Chapter seven "Filch was the Hogwarts caretaker, a bad-tempered, failed wizard who waged a constant war against the students and, indeed, Peeves." This has definitely been through the Harry filter and cannot be trusted as evidence for whether or not Filch is a Squib. katssirius From bawilson at citynet.net Sat May 20 18:48:35 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:48:35 -0400 Subject: Abuse, was re: Filch/Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152562 houyhnhnm: "Maybe we got our interpretation of the memory Harry saw during the Occlumency lesson all wrong. Maybe there never was any abuse, just a couple of dissatisfied, cantankerous personalities in a mixed marriage." BAW: That's right. Couples can argue and still love one another. I remember my parents going at it hammer and tongs; as a child I was terrified, but looking back on it as an adult I see that they were just spats. There are some people on this list who throw the A-word around a little too freely. A teacher can be harsh and unpleasant with his students without being a child abuser. A man can quarrel with his wife (or a woman with her husband) without being a spouse abuser. BAW From noon_at_night at yahoo.com Sat May 20 21:01:37 2006 From: noon_at_night at yahoo.com (Najwa) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 21:01:37 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: <007c01c67c4d$6593d130$9998400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152563 > Magpie wrote: > Oh, I don't think there is a connection to the school. It just > sounds funny, is my guess, for the hog connection, which is also > connected to Hogsmeade. The area may have originally been > associated with pigs. Then of course there's the winged > boars outside the school suggesting "when pigs fly." Najwa now: Here is some information at the possible meanings behind the wordplay on Hogwarts from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogwarts: " Rowling has suggested that the name 'Hogwarts' derives from a type of lily which she had seen at Kew Gardens some time before writing the Harry Potter books. Rowling probably settled upon this name for its comic potential, as a rearrangement of the word warthog. She may also have been influenced by the structure of the place name Oxford (Ox-ford; Hog-warts). Rowling sought a place at Oxford University, but was rejected, in her eyes on prejudicial grounds similar to those espoused by "pure-blood" advocates at Hogwarts. Harry Potter's discovery that he is a special child, destined for a magical school, can be read as a fulfillment-in-fiction of Rowling's thwarted academic objective (it should be noted that Harry and his creator share the same birthday). By coincidence, the name Hogwarts also features in the Molesworth books. The Hogwarts is the title of one of Molesworth's imitation Latin plays, and Hoggwart is also the name of the headmaster of Porridge Court, a rival of St. Custard's, Molesworth's terrible prep school. It has also been suggested that Rowling may have found some inspiration from Atlantic College, a real co-educational boarding school in Britain, which really is based in an ancient castle." I hope this helps. Sincerely, Najwa From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 21:55:36 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 21:55:36 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152564 > BAW: > And where in canon do we see Snape abusing children? I've read > the books several times, and I can't see it. He is mean, nasty, > and rude--but mean, nasty, and rude do not in themselves > constitute abuse. Umbridge, yes--she's definitely an abuser; > Snape, as unpleasant as he is, is not. I've seen real > abuse, and nothing that Snape does comes anywhere close. > And, for all his flaws, Snape's students LEARN. Those who aren't > complete morons like Crabbe and Goyle at least pass their OWLS-- > maybe not with O's or E's, but at least A's; I think that Neville > even managed to scrape an A. (Haven't the book handy.) > > In another post, I mentioned that I had a rather Snape-like > teacher; one of his catchphrases was "Teaching is not a popularity > contest." I also had teachers who were as sweet as pie, but > couldn't teach their way out of a wet paper bag. Which would you > want, for yourself or your child--a mean but effective teacher, > or a sweet but incompetent one? Assuredly the former. (Ideally > you'd want one who was nice AND effective, but we can't get > everything we want in this world, can we? And that's another life > lesson.) Leslie41: I don't think Snape abuses his students, but that issue has been hashed over a lot with people siding for and against and not a lot settled. I think a lot of the problem comes from the fact that we cannot agree on the definition of "abuse". Abuse is actually sometimes in the eye of the beholder, I think, in cases like Snape's. He doesn't physically harm his students, or take advantage of them sexually or otherwise (incidents which I think we all could agree qualify as abuse). But he does often treat them adversarially, and he has zero tolerance for incompetence. I also had a teacher in jr. high that I realize in retrospect was quite like Snape. And a friend who was very Neville-ish, in personality if not in ability (she was a high achiever). I hated this teacher, and so did she. He wasn't a particularly good teacher either. She felt terrorized by his imposing personality, and it made her physically ill. I just thought he was a complete jerk, but he didn't scare me at all. If you ask her whether or not she felt "abused," she might say yes. If you ask me, I would say absolutely not. Truthfully, I think it diminishes the authentic cases of the abuse of children to classify what Snape does as "abuse". I was a child once, I have a child, and I'm an educator myself, so I kind of understand all sides of the issue, I think. My opinion is also colored by my belief that the purpose of education, especially after a student becomes an adolescent, is not necessarily to provide the student with self-esteem, but rather with knowledge and discernment in hopes that they will develop a critical mind, and the ability to reason soundly and logically. The end result is, hopefully, a productive and informed human being who is capable of contributing something to society. From djklaugh at comcast.net Sat May 20 21:57:32 2006 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 21:57:32 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152565 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: (Snip)> Potioncat: > Filch was caretaker when the Marauders were students. So he didn't come > to Hogwarts for protection (as Snape's father) In PoA ch14 Lupin says > to Harry, "I happen to know this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch many > years ago." IMO, that means that Filch took it away from the Marauders. > There wouldn't be any reason for Snape's father to be at Hogwarts under > an assumed name while Snape was a student. I've been wondering exactly how old Filch is - When I read about his "anguish" over the loss of oldtime punishments I got the sense that he didn't just know about them but had actually used them himself - we don't know how long ago those punishments (ie hanging students up by their ankles or whipping) were abolished but I think Filch's reaction is very personal rather than of a philosophical nature. Also in OOP during the opening feast Dumbledore says "Mr Filch, the caretaker, has asked me for what he tells me is the four hundred and sixty-second time, to remind you that magic is not permitted in corridors between classes, nor are a number of other things, all of which can be checked on the extensive list now fastened to Mr. Filch's office door". Since DD makes these announcements during the opening feast each year, does this mean that Filch has been caretaker at Hogwarts for 462 years? Or is DD or Filch merely engaging in hyperbole? Deb(aka djklaugh) From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 22:07:12 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 22:07:12 -0000 Subject: Snape's Songlike Chant (Snape's Song: revised) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152566 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > I was thinking about the part in HBP where Snape "...muttered an > incantation that sounded almost like a song.(HBP US version, pg. > 523) "after the Sectumsempra that Harry performed. This reminded > me a lot of Fawkes and his song, as well as his tears. Does anyone > think there is a connection between Fawkes and Snape? I just felt > like this songlike incantation was not a conventional wizard > healing method, otherwise we'd find Madame Pomfrey singing > incantations as well as healing. I haven't noticed that any other > spell, incantation, etc. was ever described as song-like, so it > made me feel there was more to it, considering the many posts > about Snape's patronus being a phoenix and so on. > Just a thought. > > Najwa Leslie41: I too think Snape's patronus will turn out to be a phoenix, and there is a definite connection there with his status as a healer. No, the method certainly doesn't seem conventional, and this aspect of Snape's personality, I think, is of really key importance when analyzing his character, and predicting what will happen to him. Snape is a healer. This particular spell is also very pleasant to listen to, and very potent. Snape may have an affinity with the dark arts, but his status as a physician (who far exceeds Pomfrey's skills, from what I can tell) is a clue that we are not supposed to believe that he's as evil as he seems to be. He's been DD's physician throughout HBP. The fact that the healing spell is also a SONG almost makes him a poet as well. Does anyone doubt that this spell as well is his own creation? I don't. Certainly Harry has never heard it before. Snape has a lot in common with other heroic characters who both destroy and restore. Achilles, for example, is a healer as well as a killer, and was taught to heal by (of all things) a centaur. I can't think of any character on Voldemort's side who actually casts any sort of healing spell (though they are fond of unforgivables of course). From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 22:08:15 2006 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 22:08:15 -0000 Subject: LV's New Body/Was: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152567 > > Pippin wrote: > I think it might have to do with Dumbledore's famous 'gleam' in GoF. Evidently Voldemort overlooked something important when he used > Harry's blood to reconstruct his body. A new body might not have > whatever weakness Dumbledore perceived. > Angie again (exhausting her last post of the day) Oh, surely DD was not wrong! LOL. I always thought the gleam in the eye was DD's recognition that LV could be killed again, since he had regained his body, and that, as you said, his act of taking Harry's blood would have unintended consequences -- more than what we've seen. LV himself said he would "settle" for his "old body" and described his recovered powers as "his old strength." GOF, U.S. softcover at 656. To me, this means that whatever weakness his old body would have had, his new body would have. I don't remember anything that would support that LV's "new-old" body is somehow stronger than or more resistant to whatever DD believes it to be subject to. The idea that the blood/scar connection will contribute to LV's demise goes along with DD's speech about despots creating their own enemies that will be their undoing. LV could have used any wizard's blood to regenerate. But had just HAD to have Harry's and I think that will ultimately contribute to his downfall. Wonder if Wormtail will stick out his tongue and say, "Told ya we shoulda used another wizard's blood!" I hope we see Harry turning the tables on LV and somehow using the connection forged by the scar and the blood (double whammy, anyone?). Since Harry is apparently incapable of performing Dark Magic on his own, I've always pictured Harry "torturing" LV with feelings of love, and then feeding off of LV's rage from having to endure such feelings, and then using that rage to perform the AK on LV -- that way, it would be LV's inability to feel love that really kills him and not Harry's desire to kill. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 20 22:12:12 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 22:12:12 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152568 . > > Potioncat: > Filch was caretaker when the Marauders were students. So he didn't come > to Hogwarts for protection (as Snape's father) In PoA ch14 Lupin says > to Harry, "I happen to know this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch many > years ago." IMO, that means that Filch took it away from the Marauders. > There wouldn't be any reason for Snape's father to be at Hogwarts under > an assumed name while Snape was a student. > Pippin: How do we know that the current Filch is the same person? Maybe Tobias took the place of the real Filch, who is off some where enjoying a quiet retirement. Snape had to get his acting talent from somewhere -- maybe it comes from his dad, who has been taking polyjuice all these years. We can suppose that Fake!Filch was only pretending to side with Umbridge. After all, we don't hear that he actually flogged anybody, do we? I still think it's very strange that in PS/SS Snape goes to Filch to have his leg bound up and speaks to him very familiarly -- like an equal. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 22:14:59 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 22:14:59 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152569 > Leslie41: > I also had a teacher in jr. high that I realize in retrospect was > quite like Snape. And a friend who was very Neville-ish, in > personality if not in ability (she was a high achiever). I hated > this teacher, and so did she. He wasn't a particularly good teacher > either. She felt terrorized by his imposing personality, and it > made her physically ill. I just thought he was a complete jerk, but > he didn't scare me at all. If you ask her whether or not she > felt "abused," she might say yes. If you ask me, I would say > absolutely not. Alla: But don't you think that in this situation your opinion is not relevant in determining whether that teacher was abusive towards your friend? IMO if she felt abused, THAT is what counts, especially if you yourself said that this teacher made her physically ill that even though this teacher was not scaring you, you think he was a jerk. My guess is that you could handle his abuse, not let it get to you, etc and your friend could not, so IMO that does not make what he did to be less abusive. To go back to canon, I frankly do not see how Snape's crap he dishes upon Harry and Neville cannot be considered abuse. And especially after OOP,where what Snape did to Harry for five years ended up in Harry not only unable to trust Snape AT ALL, but forgetting that Snape IS the order member who can help them somehow, I just don't see how that is not the most obvious consequence of abusive teacher dishing the fruits of his labor where from his very first lesson he made Harry distrust, fear and hate him. Leslie_41: > Truthfully, I think it diminishes the authentic cases of the abuse > of children to classify what Snape does as "abuse". Alla: And I think that the fact that there are many cases of more serious abuse than what Snape does, does not make what he does any less abusive. I look at Snape's actions as Snape's actions only. I do not compare them to Umbridge, or anybody else. Because while Umbridge's abuse is unquestionably more serious, in itself Snape actions IMO are serious enough to warrant calling them abuse too. Leslie_41: I was a child > once, I have a child, and I'm an educator myself, so I kind of > understand all sides of the issue, I think. My opinion is also > colored by my belief that the purpose of education, especially after > a student becomes an adolescent, is not necessarily to provide the > student with self-esteem, but rather with knowledge and discernment > in hopes that they will develop a critical mind, and the ability to > reason soundly and logically. The end result is, hopefully, a > productive and informed human being who is capable of contributing > something to society. Alla: I was studying to be an educator, I have an educator in the family, I only worked as an educator during my student internships, but I think I have enough exposure to talk about it. I disagree that to give student self-esteem is not one of the purposes of education, BUT in any event abusive teacher IMO takes AWAY student's self-esteem, not just not provides student with such. Surely you agree that TAKING AWAY student's self-esteem is NOT a purpose of education? JMO, Alla From djklaugh at comcast.net Sat May 20 22:56:27 2006 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 22:56:27 -0000 Subject: The Dome Effect in GOF In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152570 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > > When Harry's wand locked with LV's wand in the graveyard, they > produced a golden, dome shaped web that separated Harry and LV from > the DEs. > > LV then orders the DEs to "do nothing." > > Several things I've never understood about this scene. > > First, was this "dome effect" part of the Priori Incantatem b/c Harry > and LV? The effect itself was only described as "rare" and as > forcing one of the wands to reveal the brother wand's prior spells. > Nothing about any protective domes. Deb here: I went back and read the scene again and it seems to me that the dome effect might be partly because it is Fawkes' tail feathers in Harry and LV's wands and partly because of the spells that were being thrown when their power streams connected. Harry had been hiding behind a headstone but resolved to "die upright like his father and he was going to die trying to defend himself, even if no defence was possible". He came out from behind the headstone and "As Harry shouted, "Expelliarmus" Voldemort cried, "Avada Kedavra". The red jet from Harry's wand and the green jet from LV's wand meet in midair then the wands start to vibrate and the beam of light connecting the wands changes to "bright, deep gold" - like the color of some of Fawkes feathers. So Harry's spell is to "expell" - trying to rid LV of his wand. And LV's spell is to "die" or "kill". I think the dome may have come from Harry's previous positive connection to Fawkes through his loyalty to DD. Fawkes was already DD's when he gave the feathers for the two wands so the protectiveness toward anyone loyal to DD might have been imbued in the feathers. When the wands connect the struggle to send those beads of light down the golden strand is to see which spell takes prescedence and Harry is the mentally stronger combatant at that moment because he is able to force the bead down to LV's wand. So the "expell" takes prescedence and it becomes a Priori Incantatem effect as Harry's spell causes LV's wand to 'expell" it's prior spells. (LOL that's rather convoluted - did you follow all that?) The "normal" PI spell that we saw for example earlier in GOF when Mr Diggory does it to Harry's wand after the Dark Mark appeared at the Quiddich Cup match just has the wizard putting his wand tip against the tip of the "suspect" wand and roaring (per canon) "Priori Incantato" to disgorge the previous spell done by that wand. So I think the PI effect we see in this scene was not the same exactly as the PI spell but was very similar to it. I wonder if a-the effect would have been different if Harry had shouted a different spell and b- what would have happened if LV had been stronger and had forced the bead of light into Harry's wand. Angie: > Second, if this is part of the PI effect, was is unique to Harry and > LV or would it have occurred b/w any two wizards whose wands came > from the same phoenix? And by the same phoenix, I don't mean Fawkes, > I just mean any "same" phoenix? Deb here: It might be that a similar effect would be produced if there was the same degree of connection between the phoenix and one of the combatants plus the same degree of animosity between the two combatants. It might be a normal reaction for brother phoenix feathers when they fight against each other but we have no canon on that Angie: > Third, if the dome effect is not part of the PI spell, then what > caused it? It's clearly related to Fawkes b/c Harry heard/felt the > phoenix's song emanating from the dome. He felt the song inside of > him, which he connected with DD, and felt as though a friend was > whispering in his ear, "Don't break the connection." GOF, U.S > softcover at 664. Deb here: Again I think it was because of Harry's connection to Fawkes through DD - but this may have been a unique occurrence. DD tells Harry and Severus at the end of GOF that when brother wands are forced to do battle against each other "a rare effect will take place. One of the wands will force the other to regurgitate spells it has performed - in reverse...." The previous spell for Harry had been "Stupify"(as far as I can tell from canon) when he and Cedric stunned the huge spider in the maze. If LV had forced the bead down to Harry's wand that is what would have come out first. DD doesn't give any information about the dome effect though. (Snip) Angie: > Finally, could the DEs have done anything if LV had wanted them too? > I don't think they could have, but I don't really have anything to > support that, other than the protection of the dome would have been > pretty futile of it could have been broken from the outside. I agree there is probably not much they could have done though they might have distracted the combatants by trying. > Angie (wishing everyone a happy Saturday) Deb (aka djklaugh) From celizwh at intergate.com Sat May 20 23:23:14 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 23:23:14 -0000 Subject: Pince/Filch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152571 Deb wrote: > Also in OOP during the opening feast Dumbledore > says "Mr Filch, the caretaker, has asked me for > what he tells me is the four hundred and sixty-second > time, to remind you that magic is not > permitted in corridors between classes, nor are > a number of other things, all of which can be > checked on the extensive list now fastened to Mr. > Filch's office door". Since DD makes these > announcements during the opening feast each > year, does this mean that Filch has been caretaker > at Hogwarts for 462 years? Or is DD or Filch merely > engaging in hyperbole? houyhnhnm: Filch was not there when Molly and Arthur Weasley were in school, but the old punishments were. "Your father and I had been for a nightime stroll," she said. "He got caught by Apollyon Pringle--he was the caretaker in those days--you father's still got the marks." (GoF31) This must have been before Dumbledore's time as headmaster. It seems reasonable that DD was the one who abolished the old punishments. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 23:26:24 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 23:26:24 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152572 > > Leslie41: > > I also had a teacher in jr. high that I realize in retrospect > > was quite like Snape. And a friend who was very Neville-ish, in > > personality if not in ability (she was a high achiever). I > > hated this teacher, and so did she. He wasn't a particularly > > good teacher either. She felt terrorized by his imposing > > personality, and it made her physically ill. I just thought he > > was a complete jerk, but he didn't scare me at all. If you ask > > her whether or not she felt "abused," she might say yes. If you > > ask me, I would say absolutely not. > Alla: > But don't you think that in this situation your opinion is not > relevant in determining whether that teacher was abusive towards > your friend? IMO if she felt abused, THAT is what counts, > especially if you yourself said that this teacher made her > physically ill that even though this teacher was not scaring you, > you think he was a jerk. My guess is that you could handle his > abuse, not let it get to you, etc and your friend could not, so > IMO that does not make what he did to be less abusive. Leslie41: But you're judging whether or not there was abuse on the basis of whether or not abuse is perceived, not whether or not it actually occurred. A child, for example, can feel "abused" in all sorts of situations where no abuse exists. My own child, for example, just screamed bloody murder and cried for 15 minutes because I made her sit in the "naughty chair". Other kids feel they're being abused if they don't get cell phones. I'm making some rather grandiose comparisons, I know, but the fact is that perception is not always reality. The difficulty always comes down to defining "abuse" in a way that we all can agree upon. > To go back to canon, I frankly do not see how Snape's crap he > dishes upon Harry and Neville cannot be considered abuse. Leslie41: And there's the rub. I don't. But the word "abuse" in both its noun and verb form vary extremely in their definitions. I would agree, for example, that Snape speaks to Neville and Harry rudely, and "intends to offend or hurt". I would disagree what Snape does constitutes inhumane treatment. > And especially after OOP,where what Snape did to Harry for five > years ended up in Harry not only unable to trust Snape AT ALL, but > forgetting that Snape IS the order member who can help them > somehow, I just don't see how that is not the most obvious > consequence of abusive teacher dishing the fruits of his labor > where from his very first lesson he made Harry distrust, fear and > hate him. Leslie41: Hey, I'm the last person to support Snape as a model of an emotionally healthy, self-actualized adult. But I don't think he's abusive, and I would argue that his effect on Harry has been more positive than negative, especially when you consider what Snape, (esp. as the HBP) has taught him. No bezoar, Ron *dies*. That's a fact. The HBP taught Harry how to save his best friend. And that's just one example (albeit the most potent one I think). One would be hard pressed to come up with a similar example from any one of the other "good" teachers. > > Leslie_41: > > Truthfully, I think it diminishes the authentic cases of the > > abuse of children to classify what Snape does as "abuse". > Alla: > > And I think that the fact that there are many cases of more > serious abuse than what Snape does, does not make what he does any > less abusive. I look at Snape's actions as Snape's actions only. I > do not compare them to Umbridge, or anybody else. Because while > Umbridge's abuse is unquestionably more serious, in itself Snape > actions IMO are serious enough to warrant calling them abuse too. Leslie41: I don't think what he does is "abuse" in the way I've seen that word used on this board. > Leslie_41: > I was a child once, I have a child, and I'm an educator myself, > so I kind of understand all sides of the issue, I think. My > opinion is also colored by my belief that the purpose of > education, especially after a student becomes an adolescent, is > not necessarily to provide the student with self-esteem, but > rather with knowledge and discernment in hopes that they will > develop a critical mind, and the ability to reason soundly and > logically. The end result is, hopefully, a productive and > informed human being who is capable of contributing something to > society. > > Alla: > > I disagree that to give student self-esteem is not one of the > purposes of education, BUT in any event abusive teacher IMO takes > AWAY student's self-esteem, not just not provides student with > such. > > Surely you agree that TAKING AWAY student's self-esteem is NOT a > purpose of education? Leslie41: Actually, often it is, if that self-esteem is unjustified. If a student is unjustifiably convinced of the worth of their work, it is my job to deprive them of that 'self-esteem'. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 20 23:43:04 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 23:43:04 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152573 > Leslie41: > But you're judging whether or not there was abuse on the basis of > whether or not abuse is perceived, not whether or not it actually > occurred. Alla: Sure, I was just responding to your RL example, which I have no knowledge of and not the best qualified to judge, since I did not witness. But I definitely believe that I AM qualified to judge the EVENTS which occur in canon, Snape acts, which do not change regardless of who describes them. > Leslie41: > Hey, I'm the last person to support Snape as a model of an > emotionally healthy, self-actualized adult. But I don't think he's > abusive, and I would argue that his effect on Harry has been more > positive than negative, especially when you consider what Snape, > (esp. as the HBP) has taught him. > > No bezoar, Ron *dies*. That's a fact. The HBP taught Harry how to > save his best friend. And that's just one example (albeit the most > potent one I think). One would be hard pressed to come up with a > similar example from any one of the other "good" teachers. Alla: Harry did not learn about bezoar on Snape's lessons. Harry did not learn about it while listening to Snape's insults. He read about it in the book. Does the fact that Snape wrote such a book somehow makes him less abusive? I personally don't think so. But that is IMO of course. As I said, I think that in OOP Snape ate the fruits of his labor, I think the fruits of his labor were Harry's mistrust, fear and hate. I cannot even consider this to be a positive effect. And that IMO started with "Mr. Potter, our new celebrity". For five years Snape had been hammering into Harry's head how he is like gis father, how bad of the person he is, how unjustified his celebrity status, how bad his father was, etc. Since it ended with OOP disaster, I think that the effect Snape had on Harry was very clear. IMO of course. > > Alla: > > Surely you agree that TAKING AWAY student's self-esteem is NOT a > > purpose of education? > > Leslie41: > Actually, often it is, if that self-esteem is unjustified. If a > student is unjustifiably convinced of the worth of their work, it is > my job to deprive them of that 'self-esteem'. Alla: Certainly this was not self-esteem I was talking about. I was talking about giving student a zero, when his potion was better then others, destroying student's potion "accidentally", becoming another student's boggart. Oh, and of course since Harry got an "Exceeds expectations" when Snape was not judging an exam, I am taking ANY Snape's evaluations of Harry as bad potion master with BIG grain of salt. IMO, Alla, who SO wants Snape to suffer in book 7 and that is even though he deserves do die in my book, prefers him to be alive at the end. From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Sat May 20 23:52:14 2006 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (Jazmyn Concolor) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 16:52:14 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <446FABAE.2030209@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152574 As far as what abuse is or isn't, just 'feeling' abused is not enough. I know a spoiled rotten kid who reported her parents for abuse because they would not buy her a horse. Nothing Snape does can be concidered abuse. I had a teacher that made him look like Mary Poppins.... Jazmyn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat May 20 23:53:22 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 23:53:22 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152575 > Alla: > > > And especially after OOP,where what Snape did to Harry for five > years ended up in Harry not only unable to trust Snape AT ALL, but > forgetting that Snape IS the order member who can help them somehow, > I just don't see how that is not the most obvious consequence of > abusive teacher dishing the fruits of his labor where from his very > first lesson he made Harry distrust, fear and hate him. a_svirn: I don't see how Harry's forgetfulness in OOP can be regarded as a proof of Snape's abuse. What about the mirror Sirius had given him? He managed to forget completely about it too. By the same logic it would mean that Sirius was an abusive godfather. Also what this matter of trust has to do with Snape's so-called abuse? Harry has very good reasons not to trust Snape ? he *was* a Death Eater, he used to be friends with the likes of Malfoy and the Lestranges, he was decidedly unhelpful during the Occlumency lessons, and last, but not the least ?Snape had been at loggerheads with Harry's beloved godfather throughout the OOP, so naturally he was the last person for Harry to seek help in rescuing Sirius. All these reasons were much more compelling than any grudges he might have held against Snape as a teacher. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 00:03:29 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 00:03:29 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152576 > a_svirn: > Also what this matter of trust has to do with Snape's so-called > abuse? Harry has very good reasons not to trust Snape ? he *was* a > Death Eater, he used to be friends with the likes of Malfoy and the > Lestranges, he was decidedly unhelpful during the Occlumency > lessons, and last, but not the least ?Snape had been at loggerheads > with Harry's beloved godfather throughout the OOP, so naturally he > was the last person for Harry to seek help in rescuing Sirius. All > these reasons were much more compelling than any grudges he might > have held against Snape as a teacher. Alla: The matter of trust has a lot to do IMO with Harry's unwillingness to study occlumency, the matter of trust has A LOT to do IMO with Harry feeling "imprisoned" before he goes to first lesson with Snape. IMO if students feels "imprisoned" when he is one on one in the room with his teacher it is really NOT the best environment to study Occlumency and I think that the reason why Harry felt "imprisoned" could be found in Snape's earlier behaviour towards him. And sure, Harry has a lot of good reasons to NOT trust Snape including the fact that he was a Deatheater, but isn't this the point that Snape supposedly NOT Deatheater anymore, but trustworthy member of the Order ( not that I believe it of course, just saying) and he does not IMO behave as member of the Order, but as abusive member or former member of the gang of the racists and murderers. JMO, Alla, who has no problems adding Snape being a traitor and a murderer as the reasons Harry should not trust Snape. From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sun May 21 00:17:25 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 00:17:25 -0000 Subject: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: <44A1290C-5FA4-4D53-B94D-87ACA5AA8795@golden.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152577 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, doug rogers wrote: > Well... no..... > > If the horcruxes are anchors so the main soul doesn't pass on, like the tethers to a hot air balloon, or multiple anchors on a ship, once the horcruxes are destroyed the main soul has no anchor, unless Steven1965aaa: The horcruxes are not "anchors". They are pieces of the soul. There is no "main soul". The soul is split into pieces. From djklaugh at comcast.net Sun May 21 00:18:35 2006 From: djklaugh at comcast.net (Deb) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 00:18:35 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152578 (snip) > Can I say first that I'm never sure where a fellow group member is living > so I don't know whether English is their first language or not so I apologise > if I'm "teaching my grandmother to suck eggs". Deb here: In addition to the wonderful wordplay examples already given there are such treasures as: the St Mungo's patients the female victim apparently of a failed Polyjuice potion, who has the head of a dog - being "barking mad" the patient in the waiting area who clanged - rang a bell the patient letting off a high-pitched whistle was "steamed" The Floo Network -flew through the flue Dumbledore "drawing up a chair" at Harry's disciplinary hearing Wouldn't a "leaky cauldron" also be a sieve? To "leak like a sieve" can mean to disclose secrets and a Pensieve "leaks" secret thoughts. Veritaserum has to age - like fine wine - "in vino veritas" - and Slughorn and Hagrid sure share some "truths" after getting drunk after Aragog's funeral. Deb (aka djklaugh) wondering if the first patient mentioned above was actually from China and escaped from St Mungo's then traveled to Hogwarts to meet the Whomping Willow would she be barking up the Wong Tree? From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun May 21 00:23:03 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 00:23:03 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152579 > Alla: > > And sure, Harry has a lot of good reasons to NOT trust Snape including > the fact that he was a Deatheater, but isn't this the point that Snape > supposedly NOT Deatheater anymore, but trustworthy member of the Order > ( not that I believe it of course, just saying) and he does not IMO > behave as member of the Order, but as abusive member or former member > of the gang of the racists and murderers. a_svirn: I don't think so. Harry has no problem with teachers being abusive. He applauded to Crouch Jr.'s exemplary chastisement of Draco, for instance. That was unquestionably abuse in every possible sense, and yet Harry trusted "Professor Moody" implicitly. For the simple reason that it was Draco, (and not Harry or his friends) who was on the receiving end of this abusive treatment. As for "abusive member or former member of the gang of the racists and murderers" Harry didn't see Snape behaving like them. Well, OK for "racists" he did see him calling Lilly "mudblood". But in any case that wasn't something he did in the classroom. So, although it was an additional reason not to trust him, it had nothing to do with his "abusive" teaching methods. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 00:33:21 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 00:33:21 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152580 > a_svirn: > I don't think so. Harry has no problem with teachers being abusive. > He applauded to Crouch Jr.'s exemplary chastisement of Draco, for > instance. That was unquestionably abuse in every possible sense, and > yet Harry trusted "Professor Moody" implicitly. For the simple > reason that it was Draco, (and not Harry or his friends) who was on > the receiving end of this abusive treatment. Alla: Um, my point is that Harry does not trust Snape because he was abusive towards him, which in my book is perfectly understandable whether or not Harry has a problem with abusive teachers in general. A-svirn: > As for "abusive member or former member of the gang of the racists > and murderers" Harry didn't see Snape behaving like them. Well, OK > for "racists" he did see him calling Lilly "mudblood". But in any > case that wasn't something he did in the classroom. So, although it > was an additional reason not to trust him, it had nothing to do with > his "abusive" teaching methods. Alla: Yes, that has nothing to do with one another. You brought Snape being a DE as the reason that Harry does not trust him, not me, I was just agreeing that it is a good additional reason of doing so, NOT the main one before HBP. Personally I think that Snape's abuse IS the main reason of Harry's distrust. So, what I am trying to say is that I am agreeing with you, but I was thinking more in post HBP realm, not post OOP, since Harry indeed did not have a chance to witness Snape behaviour as DE yet and with Hermione constantly repeating that DD trusts Snape , so that is Okay, etc. Basically, I don't think that Snape a DE played in Harry mistrust much. Now, POST HBP - sure, then Harry does not trust Snape, because he knows that Snape played a part in his parents deaths, because he witnessed Snape murdering Dumbledore, etc. JMO, Alla, counts to four and dissappears. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 00:28:23 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 00:28:23 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152581 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > > > > > But of course, this is patently ridiculous. We know that Lupin does > not approve, even though he doesn't put a stop to it or question > it. (Or do you think that Lupin approves?) So how can you assume > DD approves of Snape's nasty personality because HE does not > intervene? Hmmm. I don't think it is patently ridiculous. I rather think that teenage Lupin probably did, in his heart of hearts, rather approve of what happened to Snape. Lupin does have many faults. Hiding from a lot of the bad things around him, including the bad things he has been a party to, is one of them. I rather think Harry was right to be incredulous when Lupin claimed to "neither like nor dislike Severus Snape." Sounds like a case of denial to me. > > And what of Black? If you insist that Rowling's work is trash if > Snape is not punished, must not Sirius Black be postumously and > publicly vilified as well, for his attempted murder of Snape, of > which he did not repent? Must not Lupin be subjected to public > criticism for his refusal to interfere? Or is it okay for students > to torment each other to the point of public humiliation and > possible death? The faults of Sirius were also many, it is true. And yes, Rowling's work will be severely flawed if they are not dealt with. Not as flawed as with Snape, as Black's sins were nowhere near as egregious as Snape's. But, you do definitely have a point there. I would point out that they apply to Draco Malfoy as readily as to Sirius Black, but you have a point. > > I suspect that you don't want Lupin and Black subjected to scorn, no > matter what they've done or failed to stop. I suspect that you have > a blind spot when it comes to them, and an unreasonable bias against > Snape. Eh, it's human. But it's not *logical* and *reasonable*. It perfectly logical and reasonable to expect child abuse to be denounced and punished. And yes, IMO, Snape definitely IS a child abuser, over and out. > > I also suspect you will be terribly disappointed in the end when > Rowling does not accomodate your vision of how things should be. Not disappointed, actually, as I rather suspect her books will, in the end, approve of the abuse of children, and as such be worthy of nothing but contempt. But there are many sad things in the world. A popular series that approves of child abuse is reprehensible, but far from the worst thing that one faces from day to day. Lupinlore From celizwh at intergate.com Sun May 21 01:01:41 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 01:01:41 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152582 Deb here: > a Pensieve houyhnhnm: /Pensieve/ is my favorite. It is useful to those who are pensive, because it is a pen (head) sieve that allows them to sift and sort their thoughts. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 01:56:01 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 01:56:01 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152583 > > Leslie41: > > Hey, I'm the last person to support Snape as a model of an > > emotionally healthy, self-actualized adult. But I don't think > > he's abusive, and I would argue that his effect on Harry has > > been more positive than negative, especially when you consider > > what Snape, (esp. as the HBP) has taught him. > > > > No bezoar, Ron *dies*. That's a fact. The HBP taught Harry how > > to save his best friend. And that's just one example (albeit > > the most potent one I think). One would be hard pressed to come > > up with a similar example from any one of the other "good" > > teachers. > > Alla: > > Harry did not learn about bezoar on Snape's lessons. Leslie41: But of course he did. A classroom and student/teacher interaction are not required for someone to learn a lesson. The book contained what the HBP knew, and Harry read it and assimilated it. > Alla: > Does the fact that Snape wrote such a book somehow makes him less > abusive? I personally don't think so. Leslie41: But my point didn't involve Snape and whether or not he was abusive, because I don't agree he was. My point was that, whatever the negative effects Snape's lessons might have had on Harry, the positive effects surpass them utterly. And that doesn't even take into account the times Snape actively attempted to save Harry's life. In those cases, of course, he didn't impart any learning to Harry that ended up helping. He merely attempted to help Harry himself. > Alla: > As I said, I think that in OOP Snape ate the fruits of his labor, > I think the fruits of his labor were Harry's mistrust, fear and > hate. > I cannot even consider this to be a positive effect. Leslie41: But of course part of Harry's mistrust, fear, and hate is a result of his prejudice against Snape. I'm not saying that Snape doesn't do his share to engender Harry's antipathy, what I'm saying is that Harry's prejudice is against Snape is fostered by his godfather, and his own puffed-up notion of his dead dad, who actually was *not* a nice person at all, at least not at the age of 15. No doubt James Potter did strut after all. Do you really think that Harry had the right to poke about in Snape's penseive the way he did? A lot of what happens as a result can be traced directly back to that action. Harry never listens or trusts Dumbledore's position on Snape, or Lupin's, or even Hermione's. He's bound and determined to hate Snape, even when Snape has attempted to save his life. Harry has witnessed both his godfather and his father behaving quite cruelly and arrogantly towards Snape, viciously victimizing and most certainly abusing him, both physically and emotionally. But Harry doesn't gain a jot of pity for Snape as a result. He seems to feel sorry for *himself* that his vision of his father and godfather has been besmirched. Harry WANTS to hate Snape, not just because of what Snape does, but because it metaphorically joins him to his father and grandfather. He must hate Snape because they did, because he idealizes them. And I think that will be very significant in Book VII. Alla: > Snape had been hammering into Harry's head how he is like gis > father, how bad of the person he is, how unjustified his celebrity > status, how bad his father was, etc. Leslie41: Snape doesn't say Harry is a bad person. Truthfully I think he would consider that irrelevant. But he does say his celebrity status is unjustified. Because, at least when he makes that remark, it is. Harry has actually *done* nothing to merit such attention. Nothing of his own will, anyway. Snape does attack the memory of James Potter. James was not a nice person, obviously. Not a-tall. Both Sirius and James were intolerably arrogant. I don't think Snape is right about imparting the sins of the father onto the son. But there is a lot of wrong to be handed out on both sides. Harry is not an innocent with regard to his relationship with Snape. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 02:23:14 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 02:23:14 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152584 Leslie41 > > We know that Lupin does not approve, even though he doesn't put > > a stop to it or question it. (Or do you think that Lupin > > approves?) So how can you assume DD approves of Snape's nasty > > personality because HE does not intervene? Lupinlore: > > Hmmm. I don't think it is patently ridiculous. I rather think > > that teenage Lupin probably did, in his heart of hearts, rather > > approve of what happened to Snape. Lupin does have many > > faults. I rather think Harry was right to > > be incredulous when Lupin claimed to "neither like nor dislike > > Severus Snape." Sounds like a case of denial to me. Leslie41: No. Lupin, I think, is being perfectly truthful. And he absolutely did not approve of what was done to Snape. Look at his reaction when he realizes that his friends are about to torment him. Quoted from "Snape's Worst Memory": > Lupin and Wormtail remained sitting: Lupin was still staring down > at his book, though his eyes were not moving and a faint frown > line had appeared between his eyebrows; Wormtail was looking from > Sirius and James to Snape with a look of avid anticipation on his > face. Lupin refuses to participate. Not only that, he's closed himself off and does not want to be a part of any of what James and Sirius are doing at all. He doesn't even want to see it. And behind that book, he is frowning. He hates what his friends are doing to Snape. It's Wormtail who is anticipating and enjoying what his friends are about to do. Not Lupin. > Lupinlore: > The faults of Sirius were also many, it is true. And yes, > Rowling's work will be severely flawed if they are not dealt > with. Not as flawed as with Snape, as Black's sins were nowhere > near as egregious as Snape's. Leslie41: That may be very correct, if what we're talking about are Snape's actions as a Death Eater. But we really don't know exactly what he did when he was amongst Voldemort's willing minions. Or what he's done as a spy. But if you're comparing Snape's actions towards his students to Black's actions towards Snape (and who knows who else?), you're manifestly wrong, unless Snape has attempted to murder one of his charges. Remember that Black's guilty of attempted murder. That's certainly a far more egregious sin than anything I can think of regarding Snape. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 04:01:52 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 04:01:52 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152585 Alla: Midnight. Yeay. Leslie_41 > I don't think Snape is right about imparting the sins of the father > onto the son. Alla: Good, we agree on it then. Leslie_41: But there is a lot of wrong to be handed out on both > sides. Harry is not an innocent with regard to his relationship > with Snape. > Alla: LOL! I understand that it is much easier to justify Snape's behavior with this argument, when 36 years old teacher and 11 year old child are equally to blame for their behavior. But I don't think it holds water at all. Harry IS totally innocent when he first meets Snape. Harry does not KNOW Snape at all, from what I am reading in the first lesson, Harry is SO unprejudiced that he (or narrator through Harry eyes, before Carol corrects me :) is saying that Snape had a GIFT to keep class quiet. That is despite the fact that Harry already had been told bad things about Slytherin House and met Draco Malfoy, who as far as I am concerned behaved as an absolute *ss, so Harry could have had a dislike for Slytherin Head of the House , which I would find totally understandable. But he does not. He says that Snape had a gift, which to me sounds as a positive evaluation of the teacher. That is to me the remark of the student, who is ready to LIKE his teacher. And in response he gets the attack of the dog, who is biting a kid who looks just like his father. (totally my subjective description of course, but that is the picture I am getting from Snape's first lesson, as I mentioned previously) I would really like to know what SINS Harry committed against Snape when he arrives at Hogwarts, besides looking like James of course. As far as I am concerned Snape is totally owns the problem between them. I am not going to blame an eleven year old for hate of the teacher, who in my book treated him like an enemy from the moment they met. Did Harry do some things which he would be better not doing to Snape later on? Like Pensieve for example? Sure, he did. He is not perfect. But Snape started it and that is enough for me. Harry IMO does not have a prejudice against Snape. He has a very well deserved, justified hate of Snape. > Leslie41: > But if you're comparing Snape's actions towards his students to > Black's actions towards Snape (and who knows who else?), you're > manifestly wrong, unless Snape has attempted to murder one of his > charges. Remember that Black's guilty of attempted murder. That's > certainly a far more egregious sin than anything I can think of > regarding Snape. > Alla: Um, that is at least not proven. SNAPE says so. Dumbledore does not. Dumbledore says " my memory is as good as ever", which may mean many numbers of things. Show me that Sirius tied Snape up and brought him in the shack OR put him under Imperius!curse and then I may agree that he is guilty of attempted murder. Even then I would like to know what Black's intention actually was, but then there is at least some kind of case can be made for attempted murder part. Oh, and JKR said that we will learn MORE about Prank, that to me means that we do not know everything of that night. And of course there is a nice possibility that Snape already knew who Remus was since he was reading that essay about werewolves, so I can see the possibility that Snape went into Shack knowing full well whom he would be facing and maybe wanting to try his hand of kill Remus? There must be a reason why Snape assigns Harry class exactly the same essay that he wrote and we KNOW why he assigns the essay ? to point who Remus was, could it be that he learned about who Remus was under the similar circumstances and went into the Shack thinking to try his hand in disposing of the dark creature, since he liked DADA so much? Could it be that this is why Dumbledore made Snape shut up about the events of the prank so easily? Not because of Dumbledore favoring Gryffindors or any other fanfiction staff, but because Snape actually was mixed in the events of that night in NOT a good way. The possibilities are endless, but NOWHERE in canon it is stated with absolute certainty that Black is guilty of attempted murder, except from Snape mouth of course, but if Snape never lies, do you think that everything he said in the Spinner End was true too? And of course we do NOT know that Sirius Black was never punished, we only know that he was not expelled. Could it be that it was that Dumbledore thought that expulsion was too harsh of the punishment for what REALLY happened that night? JMO, Alla, who now finally decided which question she will e-mail to JKR and keeping her fingers crossed that she may answer. From dossett at lds.net Sun May 21 04:17:13 2006 From: dossett at lds.net (rtbthw_mom) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 04:17:13 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152586 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > > > The Harry Potter experience is so much fun. One of the best parts is > > that my 11 year old can read it and I can read it and we can both > > enjoy it on different levels. My 17-year old, who wouldn't read a > > book if his life depended on it, can at least discuss the story with > > me. > > Geoff: > This, I believe, is one of the factors which makes some "children's" books > so engaging to all ages. > > Among my great favourites - which I must confess I read fo rthe first > time at about the age of 23 - are the Winnie-the-Pooh books by > A.A.Milne which are ostensibly for quite young children but can very > definitely be read on two levels and can have adults howling with > laughter at the subtle jokes while children look on blankly. > > I have always be highly amused by JKR's wordplays which are sometimes > lost on young people and also will leave readers who are not native > English speakers lost. > > Consider names such as Diagon Alley, Knockturn Alley, Hogwarts, > Durmstrang, Grimmauld Place and Umbridge just to list a handful.... Pat here: I, too, enjoy HP with one of my kids - my 9-year old daughter. She got involved after I became obsessed - she saw how much fun I was having, and she'd enjoyed the media which must not be named, so we started reading together! It's really been great. re Geoff's wordplays - we were just reading in OOTP last night and I had never noticed Karkus = carcass before: it was the reading out loud that did it for me. Amazing how that works, eh? ~Pat > From evangelist at ihug.co.nz Sun May 21 04:48:05 2006 From: evangelist at ihug.co.nz (Tim) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 16:48:05 +1200 Subject: Request for new topics / the nature of magic In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <446FF105.8030106@ihug.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 152587 justcarol67 wrote: > > Ideas, anyone? Any themes we can discuss besides love, revenge, and > immortality? Can we look at the books themselves instead of our own > lives and social views? > I was just wondering whether there had been any discussion about the nature of magic. For instance, we have Dumbledore "drawing" up a chair at the court in OOtP, yet Molly and the house-elves seem to have to physically cook edible food rather than simply conjuring it. Is there a contradiction here or have i missed something? Tim From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 05:52:43 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 05:52:43 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152588 > > Leslie_41: > > But there is a lot of wrong to be handed out on both > > sides. Harry is not an innocent with regard to his relationship > > with Snape. > Alla: > I would really like to know what SINS Harry committed against > Snape when he arrives at Hogwarts, besides looking like James of > course. Leslie41: Oh my. None and none. Harry commits no "sin" against Snape whatsoever, I think (at least in my interpretation of the word), throughout the entirety of the series. I fully understand why Harry reacts the way he does to Snape, and agree that it's something that Snape contributes to, and even initiates. > As far as I am concerned Snape is totally owns the problem between > them. I am not going to blame an eleven year old for hate of the > teacher, who in my book treated him like an enemy from the moment > they met. Leslie41: Well, I am not considering Harry merely as an eleven-year-old, any more than I consider Snape as merely a man of thirty-six. By the end of HBP Harry is nearly seventeen, which is an adult in the wizarding world. I have much less pity for him regarding Snape as Harry grows older, because I think Harry should know better. Snape is emotionally crippled and Harry is not, something that Harry knows well. But the fact that Snape is an emotional cripple doesn't stop him from going to extraordinary lengths to aid Harry where it *really* counts. > Did Harry do some things which he would be better not doing to > Snape later on? Like Pensieve for example? Sure, he did. He is not > perfect. But Snape started it and that is enough for me. Leslie41: Well, that's not enough for me. That's a child's argument. And Harry, by Prisoner of Azkaban at least, is no longer a child. > Alla: > Harry IMO does not have a prejudice against Snape. He has a very > well deserved, justified hate of Snape. Leslie41: By HBP, it's prejudice. Harry tells Hermione that he thinks Snape loves the dark arts because of the very eloquent speech Snape has given about them at the beginning of class. Hermione responds that "I thought he sounded a bit like you...that it really comes down to being brave and quick thinking." Of course, what Snape is attempting to teach Harry in this lesson is quick thinking. Snape tries to hurl a non-verbal curse at Harry because Ron is incapable of it. Harry responds with a verbal shield charm, and then gets cheeky. Harry also completely misinterprets, in retrospect, the occlumency lessons, by calling himself Snape's "guinea pig." Snape no more wanted to give Harry private occlumency lessons than Harry wanted to take them from him. He did it because Dumbledore wanted him to, because it was required of him. > > Leslie41: > > Remember that Black's guilty of attempted murder. That's > > certainly a far more egregious sin than anything I can think of > > regarding Snape. > > > > Alla: > > > Um, that is at least not proven. SNAPE says so. Dumbledore does > > not. Dumbledore says " my memory is as good as ever", which may > > mean many numbers of things. > > Show me that Sirius tied Snape up and brought him in the shack > > put him under Imperius!curse and then I may agree that he is > > guilty of attempted murder. Even then I would like to know what > > Black's intention actually was, but then there is at least some > > kind of case can be made for attempted murder part. Leslie41: Well, Black deliberately tricks Snape into going to the whomping willow when Lupin is in full werewolf mode. James is the one who stops Snape, because he realizes that Snape will most likely be killed. Dumbledore tells Harry that Snape owed James Potter a "life debt" after that. Meaning that James had saved his life. So yeah, I would call what Sirius Black does attempted murder. > Oh, and JKR said that we will learn MORE about Prank, that to me > means that we do not know everything of that night. > And of course there is a nice possibility that Snape already knew > who Remus was since he was reading that essay about werewolves, so > I can see the possibility that Snape went into Shack knowing full > well whom he would be facing and maybe wanting to try his hand of > kill Remus? > There must be a reason why Snape assigns Harry class exactly the > same essay that he wrote and we KNOW why he assigns the essay ? to > point who Remus was, could it be that he learned about who Remus > was under the similar circumstances and went into the Shack > thinking to try his hand in disposing of the dark creature, since > he liked DADA so much? Leslie41: You're really *really* reaching now. There's not a shred of evidence for this, and it makes no sense. > Could it be that this is why Dumbledore made Snape shut up about > the events of the prank so easily? Not because of Dumbledore > favoring Gryffindors or any other fanfiction staff, but because > Snape actually was mixed in the events of that night in NOT a good > way. Leslie41: Erm, again, no evidence for this. > The possibilities are endless, but NOWHERE in canon it is stated > with absolute certainty that Black is guilty of attempted murder, > except from Snape mouth of course, but if Snape never lies, do you > think that everything he said in the Spinner End was true too? Leslie41: No, but when Albus Dumbledore says that by stopping Snape James Potter saved his life, and Snape owed him a life-debt as a result, I guess I believe *him*. And if James Potter saved Snape's life, then the person who deliberately put Snape in a place where he might lose it is guilty of attempted murder. Sirius Black. > And of course we do NOT know that Sirius Black was never punished, > we only know that he was not expelled. Could it be that it was > that Dumbledore thought that expulsion was too harsh of the > punishment for what REALLY happened that night? Leslie41: Well, show me the evidence and I'll consider it. But you won't get far on pointless, unsupported speculation, especially when that speculation tends to contradict the accepted facts. From iam.kemper at gmail.com Sun May 21 06:02:59 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 23:02:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Request for new topics / the nature of magic In-Reply-To: <446FF105.8030106@ihug.co.nz> References: <446FF105.8030106@ihug.co.nz> Message-ID: <700201d40605202302t4f652167o6f76c60f0a66424d@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152589 On 5/20/06, Tim wrote: > > I was just wondering whether there had been any discussion about the > nature of magic. > For instance, we have Dumbledore "drawing" up a chair at the court in > OOtP, yet Molly and the house-elves > seem to have to physically cook edible food rather than simply conjuring > it. Is there a contradiction > here or have i missed something? > kemper now: Steve wrote something back in on Sept 11, 2005 that addressed this issue that I agree with. The subject of the post: Thin Air, Choices and theEarthly/Soulfull Self. You can search it on Yahoo!mort. I have gmail, so a search is super easy though I never know the post number. Below is a cut and paste of your expressed interest of "drawing" up a chair: to make it easy for you. Enjoy. Kemper > Saraquel: > *(snip)* > > Raining ? need an umbrella, just stick out your wand. Do you > > think you have to pay in advance ? 5 knuts an item, and a fine of > > 1 sickle if not returned in 24hours. Or worse, the nearest like > > object responds to the call... > *(snip)* > > Ceridwen: > I've been going the other way, that the conjuring of objects ... is > merely utilizing existant air molecules and transfiguring them into > whatever is needed at the time. A limited spell, and when the > thing is no longer needed (and maintained), it evaporates back into > air molecules. ... > bboyminn: People seem to be looking at this issue as Black or White, one or the other, when I think the answer is really both. Some things we see are transported or transferred while other objects are conjured out of the 'nothingness'. Certainly the house-elves are merely transporting/transferring food from the kitchens where they cook it, up to the house tables above. When Dumbledore makes tea and cakes appear in Hagrid's hut, he probably simply transferred them from the kitchens. Other objects were probably conjured. Remember, according to our good friend Albert Einstein matter and energy are interchangable. They are simply different states of the same essense much like water and ice are manifestations of the same core essense. So, I suspect Conjuring is simply a energy to matter conversion similar to the Replicators and Transporters found in the Star Trek series. The problem is that when things 'magically' appear in the books, it's usually not specified as to whether we are witnessing Conjuring or Transfer Charms. So, when Dumbledore brought the purple sleeping bags into the Great Hall, we really don't know if he created them or merely moved them from another location. However, we do know that Conjured objects are transient, they are temporary; eventually they spontaneously go back the the 'nothingness' from which they came. Given the short by variable life of conjured objects, I would suspect that the sleeping bags were real and moved from a storage area, while Molly's heavy white sauce was probably conjured to save a few calories. The chair that Dumbledore /drew/ in the air for Trelawney was probably conjured while the chair that he made appear for Harry at his trial was /probably/ a real chair pulled from some other location. The ropes or lashing created by the 'incarcerous' spell are probably conjured, they would only be need for an hour or two, so they would need no permanence. The sandwiches that McGonagall make appear in Snape's office for Harry and Ron were likely real and merely transferred from the kitchens. It would make little sense to feel 'air' to hungry children. Can't prove that, and I'm not ridgedly attached to it, so consider it more of an illustration than an absolute statement of fact. So, the answer is BOTH; we see instances of object magically appearing from both Conjuring and Transfer Spells. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 05:39:34 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 05:39:34 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152590 New poster here. *waves* Might as well jump in here. > Lupinlore: > > Hmmm. I don't think it is patently ridiculous. I rather think > > that teenage Lupin probably did, in his heart of hearts, rather > > approve of what happened to Snape. Lupin does have many faults. > > I rather think Harry was right to be incredulous when > > Lupin claimed to "neither like nor dislike Severus Snape." > > Sounds like a case of denial to me. > Leslie41: > Lupin refuses to participate. Not only that, he's closed himself > off and does not want to be a part of any of what James and Sirius > are doing at all. He doesn't even want to see it. And behind > that book, he is frowning. He hates what his friends are doing to > Snape. It's Wormtail who is anticipating and enjoying what his > friends are about to do. Not Lupin. Lanval: Frankly, I think Lupin's attitude can be interpreted in a number of ways. He clearly does not approve of what's going on, but the frown might just as well be a kind of "don't-get-me-in-trouble-guys-you- know-as-prefect-I-shouldn't-let-this happen..." reaction. Personally I've never seen this as a sign of deep sympathy for Snape. Let's remember Snape was spying on Lupin and his friends. Why would Lupin have any sort of friendly feelings for a boy who might destroy what little future he had? > Leslie41: > That may be very correct, if what we're talking about are Snape's > actions as a Death Eater. But we really don't know exactly what > he did when he was amongst Voldemort's willing minions. Or what > he's done as a spy. Lanval: But we DO know quite well what the Death Eaters were up to at the time. They were going around murdering and torturing. We DO know what happened to those like Regulus Black, who refused to do Voldemort's bidding. And we DO know that Snape joined the DE's, of his own free will. So why not talk about it? Lupinlore was, I believe, talking specifically about Snape needing to be punished for abuse of children, but if we're going to bring Sirius into the discussion (on a charge completely unrelated to the subject of child abuse), then I think we should not just sweep Snape's Death Eater days under the table and say, oh well, we don't know what went on there, so we'll just disregard it. Leslie41: > But if you're comparing Snape's actions towards his students to > Black's actions towards Snape (and who knows who else?), Lanval: Who knows, indeed. Leslie41: > you're manifestly wrong, unless Snape has attempted to murder one > of his charges. Remember that Black's guilty of attempted murder. > That's certainly a far more egregious sin than anything I can think > of regarding Snape. Lanval: Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder. He's guilty of telling a nosy kid, who had a mind to get four other boys expelled, the way into a secret passage. It was Snape's own decision to enter. What business did Snape have spying on Lupin, when he knew that Dumbledore must have sanctioned whatever went on? After all, Snape saw Lupin with Madame Pomfrey, did he not? (And why, why would Snape listen to ANYTHING Sirius told him to do?) To me, (as to Alla, who explains it so much better in her post) Dumbledore's remark about his memory being as good as ever indicates that Snape's role might not simply have been that of Innocent Little Lamb, tricked into the lion's ..er, wolf's den, by the Evil Sirius Black. And while we're talking Sirius and Snape, and compare accumulated sins, we should remember that Snape really DID try to have Sirius (and possibly Lupin!) killed at the end of POA -- worse, Kissed by a Dementor -- without a trial, without listening to the evidence. Even after he is told that Sirius is innocent, he throws a spittle-flying tantrum for not getting his way. And if Snape is DDM all the way... what reason would he have to doubt Dumbledore? Lanval, who's torn between being supremely baffled and highly amused, having read the recent Sexy!Snape posts... From catlady at wicca.net Sun May 21 06:15:40 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:15:40 -0000 Subject: Socks of Erised/Vanishing Cabinets/Victorian Morality /Nvbl / Drawing Up Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152591 houyhnhnm wrote in : << I, too, have been puzzled by DD's comment about seeing himself with socks in the Mirror of Erised. I took it partly as an evasion and partly as an example of Dumbledorian whimsy, but also felt it must have some added significance. I never made the connection with Dobby and his socks of liberation though. What is the nature of Dumbledore's servitude? And whence comes his power which seems to be so far beyond that of other wizards? >> My friend got a theory after reading CoS, that Dumbledore is Nicolas Flamel's House Elf, disguised with Flamel's permission as a human. His strong magic is because House Elves have stronger magic than wizards. The socks of Erised are his desire to be freed from slavery (even though Flamel must be, in this theory, a very kind master). I, of course, believe that DD is human and that the socks of Erised are the hideously ugly and not very comfortable hand-knit ones his late wife or late mother used to give him for Christmas every year. What he wants is the deceased beloved, not the socks themselves. Another theory is that Socks of Erised show that his heart's desire is to free all the House Elves of Hogwarts, but they don't want it (yet). The servitude of the human wizard Dumbledore is 'from whom much has been given, much is due'. Born with great magic power and great intelligence, and having acquired so much knowledge and also a liking of goodness, he feels bound to fight evil, guide children, try to protect the wizarding world, and thus he is still Headmaster of the Hogwarts and leader of the Order of the Phoenix, not retired, at an age when he is both physically tired and his heart is tired of all these deaths and betrayals. I believe he looked forward to death not so much as 'the next great adventure' but as a chance to rest. Sue whtwitch91 wrote in : << The vanishing cabinets are not like a pair of shoes, they don't even look alike, one is black, the other black and gold and in conventional muggle magic they work alone, usually. Someone, I think, set them up to work together as a passageway between Borgin and Burkes and Hogwarts. Who would do such a thing, and why? (snip) there is a reason why someone would want to go from Borgin and Burkes to Hogwarts and that is Voldemort himself. (snip) he came back to Hogwarts to ask for a teaching position that he didn't really want. On that visit he could have taken a nostalic tour and casully touched the cabinet. A quick spell and it is linked to the Knockturn Alley cabinet. >> It could be. My theory is that the pair of cabinets were originally created linked, and only because people didn't know of the link did they call them Vanishing Cabinets instead of Portal Cabinets or whatever their real name is. I figure one was in the Headmaster's office or living quarters and the other was in the home of the Headmaster's girlfriend or boyfriend or somewhere else he often to visit often. When that Headmaster died, the new Headmaster didn't want that ugly cabinet and ordered it moved. When the owner of the other cabinet died, his/her heirs sold most of the stuff, some of it to Borgin and Burkes. I don't know how much magic it takes to make or to connect Portal Cabinets. Gerry wrote in : << There is no indication whatsoever that the WW has this kind of Victorian morals. >> GoF Chapter 27: << "I told you!" Ron hissed at Hermione, as she stared down at the article. "I told you not to annoy Rita Skeeter! She???s made you out to be some sort of ??? of scarlet woman!" Hermione stopped looking astonished and snorted with laughter. "Scarlet woman?" she repeated, shaking with suppressed giggles as she looked round at Ron. "It???s what my mum calls them," Ron muttered, his ears going red again. >> steven1965aaa wrote in : << we know James used the [Levicorpus] Spell, and we know that Snape invented it. How did James learn the spell? Since its nvbl, he did not hear Snape say it and copy him. He could only have learned it from the HBP potions book. How did he get his hands on Snape's potions book? >> As Zanooda wrote in : << Lupin told Harry that the spell was very popular :"There were a few months in my fifth year when you couldn't move for being hoisted into the air by your ankle" (HBP, 336 US, 315 UK). >> However the knowledge of the spell got around, it seems intensely unlikely that it was by dozens and dozems of students all getting their hands on Snape's potions book. I suppose Snape taught it to some of his Slytherin friends, who taught it to other Slytherins, one of whom taught it to his/her Ravenclaw girl/boy/friend, who taught it to the other Ravenclaws, including a Ravenclaw prefect who taught it to the Hufflepuff and Gryffindor prefects... Tim wrote in : << For instance, we have Dumbledore "drawing" up a chair at the court in OOtP, yet Molly and the house-elves seem to have to physically cook edible food rather than simply conjuring it. Is there a contradiction here or have i missed something? >> When Dumbledore draws up a chair for Professor Trelawney in PoA, "And he did indeed draw a chair in midair with his wand, which revolved for a few seconds before falling with a thud between Professors Snape and McGonagall." and when he conjures up hundreds of squashy purple sleeping bags in the same book, he might be summoning them from a storage room rather than creating them ex nihilo. Or he might, as a particularly powerful wizard, be able to create things that last for as much as several hours before dissolving back into nothingness. Food that dissolves back into nothingness wouldn't be very nutritious, although it is often yearned for by those of us with weight problems. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 07:25:07 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 07:25:07 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152592 Najwa wrote: > > Hogwarts is a flower isn't it? How could it be word play unless > someone means by the school representing abnormal growths on pigs? I > don't get the wordplay there, and come to think of it, I don't see why > a school should be named after a flower unless there is some deep > meaning behind that flower, which I'm sure someone will tell me that > there is. Sorry, I'm horrible at Herbology. Carol responds: Good catch. The plant is actually spelled "Hogswort," which JKR would probably consider an amusing name (considering the fun she got out of "nitwit, blubber, oddment, tweak"), especially in connection with warthogs. Put the two together and you have "Hogwarts," certainly an odd name for a school of any sort. I think that Hogsmeade (Hog's meadow) and the Hog's Head Inn grew out of the "hog-" prefix and the colorful names of English towns and inns in general. BTW, hogswort evidently has medicinal value and ought to be a potions ingredient if it isn't one. I found this reference online: "I was able to retard the complete seizure of her muscles and almost totally restore the limb through the judicious use of a poultice of mustard, radish, and hogswort," apparently a line spoken by a character in a Jane Austen-inspired online novel (Austen fanfic?). Here's the link if anyone cares to follow it up: http://www.austen.com/derby/sofie6.htm At any rate, I think JKR is just having fun with words here even if the wordplay doesn't qualify as a pun. Maybe a spoonerism of sorts as someone mentioned upthread: "hogwarts" sounds like a misspelling or misreading of "hogswort" that JKR may actually have heard somewhere and collected. (I have all sorts of useless trivia of that sort, the latest being "aqua pella" for "a cappella." One of my favorites is "holding down the fork.") Carol, wondering if Healer!Snape will discover the twelve use of hogswort in the Epilogue :-) From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 07:49:58 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 07:49:58 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152593 > > Leslie41: > > Lupin refuses to participate. Not only that, he's closed > > himself off and does not want to be a part of any of what James > > and Sirius are doing at all. He doesn't even want to see it. > > And behind that book, he is frowning. He hates what his friends > > are doing to Snape. It's Wormtail who is anticipating and > > enjoying what his friends are about to do. Not Lupin. > > Lanval: > Frankly, I think Lupin's attitude can be interpreted in a number > of ways. He clearly does not approve of what's going on, but the > frown might just as well be a kind of "don't-get-me-in-trouble- > guys-you-know-as-prefect-I-shouldn't-let-this happen..." reaction. > Personally I've never seen this as a sign of deep sympathy for > Snape. Let's remember Snape was spying on Lupin and his friends. > Why would Lupin have any sort of friendly feelings for a boy who > might destroy what little future he had? Leslie41: It's not so much a matter of Lupin having "friendly" feelings for Snape, as much as him really hating the fact that his friends are so malicious. For example, it's not evident that Lily likes Snape. She tells James "you're as bad as he is." But she doesn't like the fact that James is such a nasty piece of business. That he picks on people just because he can (this is her interpretation, with which I agree). She would defend anyone in that situation. As Lupin would be bothered no matter who was being turned upside down. > > Leslie41: > > That may be very correct, if what we're talking about are > > Snape's actions as a Death Eater. But we really don't know > > exactly what he did when he was amongst Voldemort's willing > > minions. Or what he's done as a spy. > > Lanval: > But we DO know quite well what the Death Eaters were up to at the > time. They were going around murdering and torturing. We DO know > what happened to those like Regulus Black, who refused to do > Voldemort's bidding. And we DO know that Snape joined the DE's, of > his own free will. So why not talk about it? Leslie41: Well, okay. But we don't know exactly what he did, so it's hard to. Murder? Maybe. But it isn't stated. Torture? Ditto. I'm not trying to defend the fact that Snape was a Death Eater. I just don't know precisely what he did. We know about many murders committed by Voldemort's followers. Some of them have have been blatantly described to us. Voldemort, Bellatrix, Pettigrew, etc. Snape's position as a D.E. is left just a bit vague, I think purposefully. > Lupinlore was, I believe, talking specifically about Snape needing > to be punished for abuse of children, but if we're going to bring > Sirius into the discussion (on a charge completely unrelated to > the subject of child abuse), then I think we should not just sweep > Snape's Death Eater days under the table and say, oh well, we > don't know what went on there, so we'll just disregard it. Leslie41: I'm not saying we should disregard it at all, but that wasn't the way the discussion was heading. I am a person who thinks that Snape is Dumbledore's man. Snape was in the Death Eaters, did damage therein (some of it made plain to us, some not, etc.), but according to Dumbledore repented of his former actions, and has repeatedly risked his life and sacrificed much for the side of good, including saving Harry's life. The problem as I see it with Sirius Black is that he never repented of his actions, and stubbornly maintained that Snape 'deserved' what Sirius doled out. > Lanval: > > Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder. He's guilty of > telling a nosy kid, who had a mind to get four other boys > expelled, the way into a secret passage. It was Snape's own > decision to enter. Leslie41: I predict many detectives and lawsuits in your future. > What business did Snape have spying on Lupin, when he knew that > Dumbledore must have sanctioned whatever went on? Leslie41: None. Doesn't mean you want to go and deliberately get the guy killed. As for the spying part, well Harry Potter himself bears a striking resemblence to Snape regarding his investigation into areas that bear Dumbledore's sanction. > To me, (as to Alla, who explains it so much better in her post) > Dumbledore's remark about his memory being as good as ever > indicates that Snape's role might not simply have been that of > Innocent Little Lamb, tricked into the lion's ..er, wolf's den, by > the Evil Sirius Black. Leslie41: Oh, I don't think Snape is innocent by any means. And I don't think Black is evil. I *like* Sirius Black. As I said in a previous post, I tend to give all the characters a good deal of slack. My point is that people seem very willing to indict Snape for his behaviors (or even *invent* nasty things he's done), when other characters do things that are just as, or far more blameworthy. But (IMHO) because those other characters are charismatic, or handsome, or well-liked, they don't seem to have to bear the responsibility or the blame for their actions the way Snape does. They're given a "pass". Not fair. Just not fair. > And while we're talking Sirius and Snape, and compare accumulated > sins, we should remember that Snape really DID try to have Sirius > (and possibly Lupin!) killed at the end of POA -- worse, Kissed by > a Dementor -- without a trial, without listening to the evidence. Leslie41: Go back and read POA very carefully, paying very close attention to what Snape hears and what he doesn't, when he's unconscious and when he's awake. Rowling does, that's for sure. As for Lupin, Snape certainly is under the impression that the werewolf is in cahoots with Black, but that's the exact impression that Harry and Hermione came to as well, if you recall. And he doesn't harm Lupin. He merely binds him. As for Black, if Snape had wanted to kill him he could have. "Give me a reason," he says. But the only reason he really needs is that Sirius Black, escapee from Azkaban, is standing right in front of him. He would have been praised as a great hero. But he doesn't kill him. As for Snape and the dementors, since when is it up to Snape who gets kissed? I'm not saying he wouldn't have been pleased with the result, of course, but Snape's not the one controlling the dementors, or doling out Black's punishment either. That punishment was set already, and not by Snape. So, in light of everything, what reason would Snape have had to trust Black, or spare him, even if he hadn't been tormented by him as a boy? Harry's suggestion? Not good enough, especially since, if you recall, Snape was listening under the invisibility cloak while Black told Lupin that Snape nearly getting killed "served him right". No wonder Snape seems beyond reason. Snape seems to think as well that he's saved the students, and truthfully, why shouldn't he? There's Sirius Black, known murderer, and his old cohort, who knew he was an animagus and didn't tell anyone. I know what *I* would have thought. Meanwhile, Harry is berating Snape and bringing up how Snape had been "made a fool of" at school, instead of thanking Snape for saving his life. Now, I'm not saying Snape is right about the situation. He's not. What I'm saying is that he has come to the same conclusion any sane person would have come to (including the trio), and that his intent is to spare the children and to capture the wrongdoers. After that, Snape is unconscious. He doesn't hear a whit of Black's impassioned defense to Harry's interrogation. Doesn't see Pettigrew transform. He's not a witness to any of that. All he heard and saw was an old nemesis, wanted for murder, who still wasn't sorry he'd tried to kill him. But yet, in all that, everyone still seems to think Snape behaved terribly, that he "didn't listen to the evidence". It wasn't his job to listen to the evidence, first of all. And the trial had already taken place. Sirius Black was a condemned murderer. It was Snape's job to capture him. ("How I hoped I would be the one to *catch* you") he says. Second of all, when the evidence for Black's innocence is revealed, Snape doesn't hear it because he's unconscious. So what, pray tell, did he do that was so wrong? > Even after he is told that Sirius is innocent, he throws a spittle- > flying tantrum for not getting his way...what reason would he have > to doubt Dumbledore? Leslie41: At this point, Dumbledore never even attempts to tell Snape that Black is innocent. What Dumbledore, in fact, tells Harry and Hermione is that "there is not a shred of proof to support Black's story," admitting as well that "the word of two thirteen-year-old wizards will not convince anybody". No one, NO ONE is going to be inclined to believe Harry and Hermione. At this point, why should Snape? Much later, in OotP, Snape has obviously been briefed on Black's innocence and accepts it, even to the point of shaking hands with him. Leslie41, who must go to bed now, but is neverendingly fascinated by the fact that any of us seem to believe an awful lot of nasty things about Snape that just aren't true, when we actually examine the situations involved. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun May 21 12:04:24 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 12:04:24 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152594 Carol wrote: > At any rate, I think JKR is just having fun with words here even if > the wordplay doesn't qualify as a pun. Maybe a spoonerism of sorts as > someone mentioned upthread: "hogwarts" sounds like a misspelling or > misreading of "hogswort" that JKR may actually have heard somewhere > and collected. (I have all sorts of useless trivia of that sort, the > latest being "aqua pella" for "a cappella." One of my favorites is > "holding down the fork.") Potioncat: We learned about Spooner at church last week, who once intended to call Christ a "loving shepherd" but instead said "shoving leopard." I missed the rest of the sermon I was laughing so hard. Aren't some of the magical items, candy and such, spoonerisms? You don't catch them unless you're British. I remember reading something along that line, but I don't remember the words. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? (I rarely do.) > Carol, wondering if Healer!Snape will discover the twelve use of > hogswort in the Epilogue :-) Potioncat: Nice idea. Which reminds me of a sort of twist on words when Snape refers to the "exact art and subtle science" in Harry's first Potions class. Potioncat, hoping that isn't movie contamination like "silly wand waving." From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun May 21 12:15:33 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 12:15:33 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152595 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Carol, wondering if Healer!Snape will discover the twelve use of > > hogswort in the Epilogue :-) > > Potioncat: > Nice idea. Which reminds me of a sort of twist on words when Snape > refers to the "exact art and subtle science" in Harry's first Potions > class. > > > Potioncat, hoping that isn't movie contamination like "silly wand > waving." Geoff: It isn't contanimation; there is a slight re-wording but the relevant bits of Snape's 'maiden speech' are: '"You are here to learn the subtle science and exact art of potion-making," he began. He spoke in barely more than a whisper but they caught every word - like Professor McGonagall, Snape had the gift of keeping a class silent without effort. "As there is little foolish wand-waving here, many of you will hardly believe this is magic..." (PS "The Potions Master" p.102 UK edition) From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Sun May 21 12:24:56 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 12:24:56 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152596 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I think that [snip]the Hog's Head Inn grew out of the "hog-" prefix and the colorful names of English towns and inns in general. Steven1965aaa: One prior use of "Hogs Head" I can think of, just for fun: "Over men and horses hoops and garters Lastly through a hogshead of real fire! In this way Mr. K will challenge the world!" "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite", the Beatles. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun May 21 12:32:34 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 12:32:34 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152597 Leslie41: > Oh, I don't think Snape is innocent by any means. And I don't think Black is evil. I *like* Sirius Black. As I said in a previous post, I tend to give all the characters a good deal of slack. My point is that people seem very willing to indict Snape for his behaviors (or even *invent* nasty things he's done), when other characters do things that are just as, or far more blameworthy. But (IMHO) because those other characters are charismatic, or handsome, or well-liked, they don't seem to have to bear the responsibility or the blame for their actions the way Snape does. They're given a "pass". Not fair. Just not fair. Ceridwen: Then you are taking the extreme position here in order to argue and expose various points? I've enjoyed the exchanges. This only makes me want to answer differently, that's all, since I agree with several points presented here. Just a note, though, before I jump in: It seems that an extreme viewpoint coaxes equally extreme viewpoints out of people. I enjoy reading the debates, but I start to cringe when they become polarized. There is middle ground... Now, for my own polarization. *g* The Prank, for all of its weight in the dynamics between Snape and the Marauders, is never fully explained. What do we know? That Sirius said or did something to lure Snape to the Shack; that for whatever reason, Snape decided to put some faith in what Sirius did or said and went; that Remus was in full werewolf mode and Snape got a glimpse of him; that James saved him; that Sirius was never expelled; that Snape kept quiet about it. We can speculate until book 7 is released, but this is all we really have to go on. My own interpretation, and this is all it is before someone asks for canon, is that this is part of an escalating 'war' between the Marauders and Snape. Sirius says that James disliked Snape from the beginning due to his interest and skill with the Dark Arts. By fifth year, the Marauders are tormenting Snape when he is seemingly doing nothing to them at the time. And we are told, by Sirius I believe, but I could be wrong, that Snape is nosey about them and where they go on the full moon. Either the person who said that is delusional, or Snape did something not revealed to us that gave that impression. So, Sirius, having been shown to be impulsive even in his thirties (Azkaban effect, I know, but he was in his early twenties when he went in, so he should have been that mature at least) devises a way to get Snape into the Shrieking Shack. At that time he doesn't think about what might happen, only that he's 'curing' Snape from being so nosey at his and his friends' expense. At some point, he either has a laugh with James about his clever plan, or he begins to worry after the fact that Snape might be killed and confesses to James. Because otherwise, when Remus was a werewolf, James would have been a stag, and not as likely to be able to save Snape in time, in such cramped quarters. I know that the point of the three friends becoming Anamagi is to both keep Remus company and to try and buffer what might otherwise happen, but in a closed-in place like a house, a stag would be too large to do much of anything, unless and until Rowling shows us differently. That's why I think James had prior knowledge, though I could be wrong, and was not transformed when Snape went in. In fact, I think James followed Snape in, too far behind to prevent his seeing Remus, but close enough to save him before anything happened. This is yet another landmark in the escalation of hostilities between the Marauders and Snape. Only it turns out to be a watershed moment. Sirius went beyond the line, not on purpose in my opinion, but because he has been shown to act before he thinks. Snape may have had an inkling about the werewolf aspects - I believe that this happened after the Pensieve scene - so the students had already covered the symptoms of werewolves in DADA. Snape is sharp. There is every possibility that he suspects. Alla is right that we don't know that Sirius wasn't punished, only that he wasn't expelled. I wonder if some of the detentions Harry was set to copy might have revealed the punishment if he went far enough into the cards? That could be some clue, though we don't know. On the surface, it looks like Snape set Harry a unique punishment, nothing more. But if the entire incident was hushed up, which it seems to be, then the reason for the detentions would not have been listed as 'trying to kill SS'. So, would Harry even know then? I disagree that Sirius purposely wanted to kill Snape. As I mentioned, I think he was an impulsive man who was an impulsive boy, and the reason this is called a 'Prank' is because that's how Sirius envisioned it. Yes, Snape could have been killed. And, Remus could have been guilty of killing him, which I don't think would have set well with Remus. It would all have been Sirius's fault. But not maliciously thought of beforehand. Manslaughter, perhaps? I keep returning to the fact that there was animosity between the Marauders, or at least James, and Snape from their first year, according to Sirius. And as the years progress, based on real life, it probably escalated from just griping about each other and some sniping, to more physical things such as the Pensieve scene and the Prank. Sirius never tells us, through Harry, what Snape did to them. So we are left with less information than we would like. The Prank just seems like the extreme that would be logical given their feud and Sirius's and Snape's personalities. It also seems like one of those incidents that give all parties a wake-up call, a watershed event that turned out to be a major turning point in all of their lives. It bound Snape to James with the Life Debt, it exposed Remus to the possibility of killing a fellow student, it may have showed James and Remus at least that Sirius was out of control on some issues, and for some reason, Dumbledore did not find it enough to expell Sirius but did find some reason for Snape to keep quiet about it. The Prank seems to play some important part in the backstory leading up to the Potters' death, the temporary vanquishment of LV, Snape's damaged emotions, in fact, the entire underlying base of the story that we're reading. I sincerely hope there is something more to it than merely a schoolboy prank gone wrong. I hope we learn everything about it in book 7, because it does seem to be important to the current events. Until then, all we have is speculation based on how we each interpret the characters and surrounding events. Dang, that's disappointing! Ceridwen. From vuurdame at xs4all.nl Sun May 21 12:48:08 2006 From: vuurdame at xs4all.nl (festuco) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 12:48:08 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152598 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > ::raises eyebrow:: You're telling me Tom was hard done by because > he had no opportunity to frame his wife for adultery? > > Pippin: > > > The marriage was made as soon as the partners gave free consent > > > in a recognized way...and the law in 1926 did not recognize > > persuasion by > > > means other than force as coercion. Which is what Merope did. She used force. > > Gerry: > > Again, Mufflre law. Wizarding law undoubtedly would. > > Pippin: > Undoubtedly? Fridwulfa seems to have deserted her husband. We > have no idea what wizard family law is like or even if there is any. > In any case, I doubt the wizengamot would have taken over the > financial responsibility for Merope and baby Tom if they could > get the gold from Tom Sr. They'd have a case against Merope for > causing harm and distress to a Muggle, but I don't know that > they'd have invalidated the marriage because she used a love > potion. They seem to be in pretty common use if Fred and George > can sell them openly. Not to use on Muggles and certainly not to keep feeding them with them. That is misuse of magic, which is a crime as we know. And it is a violation of the International Statue of Secrecy. Quite possibly they would have granted the divorce and obliviated Tom. The financial responsibility of the baby would lie with Merope, who as a witch in a society that was far more emancipated at the time would have been expected to find a job. > Pippin: > "You see, within a few months of their runaway marriage, Tom Riddle > reappeared at the manor house in Little Hangleton without his wife." > More than three, less than six. And it takes only once to get pregnant. > > > > Pippin: > Molly does not point out, though she might have, that she and Arthur > had known each other for seven years or so at Hogwarts. So? Why would that be relevant? There is a big difference between knowing someone for years and loving someone for years. > People were still very sure that allowing people to divorce because > they were unhappy or had made a mistake would impugn the > sanctity of marriage and be the ruin of the country. This would not have been a divorce because of unhappiness, but because the marriage was due to force. Tom did not marry Merope out of free will, but because he was either drugged or cursed. She is a criminal and a society that knew this kind of crime was possible would have made laws to protect people against it. That is why my point is that in Muggle Britain Tom would have been legally responsible, but only because Muggle Britain was not equiped to deal with these situations. I expect they would have been under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Magic. In these kind of situations it is no use to keep talking about Muggle law. Muggle law would condone people who killed while being under Imperius to death in those days. So should a person to which this happened been executed? Gerry From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun May 21 12:52:35 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 12:52:35 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152599 Steven1965aaa: > > One prior use of "Hogs Head" I can think of, just for fun: > > "Over men and horses hoops and garters > Lastly through a hogshead of real fire! > In this way Mr. K will challenge the world!" > > "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite", the Beatles. Ceridwen: Oh, you just kick-started my memory. A hogshead is a unit of measurement. Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogshead A hogshead of something was an exact measurement, like a gallon or a dram. In the song, they are going through a particular size of fire. In the pub, they're consuming liquid, a valid item to be measured by a hogshead. (Holy mackerel! A hogshead is 63 gallons! That's a lot of ale!) Ceridwen. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 21 13:27:07 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 13:27:07 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152600 > Alla: > > The matter of trust has a lot to do IMO with Harry's unwillingness to > study occlumency, the matter of trust has A LOT to do IMO with Harry > feeling "imprisoned" before he goes to first lesson with Snape. IMO if > students feels "imprisoned" when he is one on one in the room with his > teacher it is really NOT the best environment to study Occlumency and > I think that the reason why Harry felt "imprisoned" could be found in > Snape's earlier behaviour towards him. Pippin: Are you saying that Draco was able to learn occlumency from Bella because she's so genuinely gentle and trustworthy and kind? So very, very sane? Draco's success, despite having a teacher who is far more sadistic than Snape, shows us what JKR had already told us herself: the reason for Harry's failure to learn occlumency was that he's just not equipped for it. Snape might as well have tried to teach a giraffe to sing. The antipathy between Snape and Harry made each think the other was not trying, but they were both wrong. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 21 13:27:07 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 13:27:07 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152601 > Alla: > > The matter of trust has a lot to do IMO with Harry's unwillingness to > study occlumency, the matter of trust has A LOT to do IMO with Harry > feeling "imprisoned" before he goes to first lesson with Snape. IMO if > students feels "imprisoned" when he is one on one in the room with his > teacher it is really NOT the best environment to study Occlumency and > I think that the reason why Harry felt "imprisoned" could be found in > Snape's earlier behaviour towards him. Pippin: Are you saying that Draco was able to learn occlumency from Bella because she's so genuinely gentle and trustworthy and kind? So very, very sane? Draco's success, despite having a teacher who is far more sadistic than Snape, shows us what JKR had already told us herself: the reason for Harry's failure to learn occlumency was that he's just not equipped for it. Snape might as well have tried to teach a giraffe to sing. The antipathy between Snape and Harry made each think the other was not trying, but they were both wrong. Pippin From celizwh at intergate.com Sun May 21 14:00:10 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 14:00:10 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152602 Lanval: > But we DO know quite well what the Death Eaters > were up to at the time. They were going around > murdering and torturing. [snip} > Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder. > He's guilty of telling a nosy kid, who had a mind > to get four other boys expelled, the way into a > secret passage. houyhnhnm: Snape may not have been into murdering and torturing himself and he may not even have actually participated in any such acts, but by joining the Death Eaters (as a late adolescent)he became responsible for acts they carried out whether he participated or not. He is responsible for the deaths of James and Lily Potter because he reported the contents of the prophecy to Voldemort, even though he may not have foreseen such a consequence and never wanted them to die. Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder because he was just a high-spirited prankster afflicted with a teenage brain that could not foresee the consequences of his act. He didn't really want Snape to die. So: People are responsible for the unintended consequences of their actions. Or People are not responsible for the unintended consequences of their actions. Which is it? This is what bothers me about the arguments of the anti-Snapists on this list. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Sun May 21 14:17:39 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 14:17:39 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152603 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > > I think that [snip]the Hog's Head Inn grew out of the "hog-" prefix > and the colorful names of English towns and inns in general. > > > Steven1965aaa: > > One prior use of "Hogs Head" I can think of, just for fun: > > "Over men and horses hoops and garters > Lastly through a hogshead of real fire! > In this way Mr. K will challenge the world!" > > "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite", the Beatles. Geoff: I think this is a different usage to that of "Hog's Head" as a pub name. It refers, I suspect, to a "hogshead" which is a large cask of wine or beer and also used to describe a measure of wine or beer of just over 50 Imperial gallons. From richter at ridgenet.net Sun May 21 14:47:56 2006 From: richter at ridgenet.net (richter_kuymal) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 14:47:56 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152605 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: (snippage). Remember that Black's guilty of attempted murder. That's > certainly a far more egregious sin than anything I can think of > regarding Snape. PAR: actually, no we don't. We know SNAPE accuses him of that and that DD tells him that "my memory is as good as ever". We don't hear DD agree with Snape's view. Nor does Lupin call it attempted murder. What we see in "Snape's Worst Memory" may be the truth -- presuming that Snape can't alter a memory more effectively than Slughorn, which is debatable-- but it may not be the WHOLE truth. We have Lily accuse James of "hexing" people in the hallways. I see James and the Marauders as being rather like the twins -- happily and unthinkingly giving out their version of ton tongues and canary treats, trying out "toe growing" hexes and silencing hexes. There seems to be a fair amount of tolerance in the WW for that sort of thing. Harry does it and he's the series hero. The twins do it and they aren't expelled. It's actually SOLD publically in joke shops located in the main street of the major shopping area -- and sufficently popular for there to be competing shops. The twins' shop is SO popular that they become rich within a year of opening. Are some of these things wrong? Yes. and we see, in HBP, that James and Sirius got a lot of detentions. As did the Twins -- but as they say in 0OP-- they do draw the line at TRUE mayhem (which they abandon when Umbrage gives them lifetime bans on Quiddich). There's no evidence that Sirius intended to KILL Snape rather than intending him to "get a lesson" because in Sirius' view he was always sneaking around, etc. In fact, the "Snape's worst memory" rather indicates exactly that to me. The image of the student pretending to read a book and "just happening" to wander by so that they can snoop is actually quite a common one in "kid detective" stories. And if Snape was trying to prove Lupin was a werewolf so he could be expelled (or worse. The treatment of werewolves is hardly an enlightened one in the WW), then Sirius may have planned to "give him what he was asking for" without thinking about the danger. I am hoping JKR provides further information in book 7 on "the prank", becasue I am of the belief that there is a LOT more behind it than what we see, and that a lot of what is behind it is a "war" between two groups of students who were perhaps not wise in how they conducted themselves. What we do know is that James saved Snape and that Snape has never acknowledged this as being anything but self serving. Snape is not an unbiased witness, pensieve or no. One can take quotes out of context and make them appear to mean the opposite of what the author intended. I believe one can take scenes or actions out of context and make them seem a lot different than what they would be if the WHOLE truth were known. For example: the levicorpus, scorgify, etc appear very very wrong (and should have got Sirius & James serious detentions) BUT if they themselves had been subjected to the same off and on before that, then it doesn't have the power it did -- it becomes a case of a different culture having a different level of what was "too much". And we have a hint of just that with the "you could hardly walk down the corridors without being hoist by your ankles". As for Snape, I've had teachers like him myself and also individuals in other positions of authority like him. Never liked them then, don't like them now. And yes, I consider all of them to be abusing their positions of authority. Nor do I consider any of them to be good teachers or good leaders. If all it takes to be a good teacher is to provide a decent book, why then History and Binns is a great class because Herimonie has "Hogwarts, a History" and other books. That some students don't mind and some manage to learn DESPITE Snape does not make one a good teacher. And there is a big difference between an ADULT doing this to kids and two people of equal age and roughly equal abilities having it out. Snape/Sirius is nothing compared to the abuse of Snape/kids. PAR From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sun May 21 15:24:31 2006 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (Ffred Clegg) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 16:24:31 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? References: <1148159194.4686.62795.m29@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000301c67cea$a9c94810$8b0b6bd5@Billie> No: HPFGUIDX 152606 > Magpie wrote: > Oh, I don't think there is a connection to the school. It just sounds > funny, is my guess, for the hog connection, which is also connected to > Hogsmeade. The area may have originally been associated with pigs. As an > aside, Swineherds were often associated with madness and therefore sort of > Shamanistic visions. Merlin in some legends was mad for a time, and I > think > also tended pigs. Then of course there's the winged boars outside the > school suggesting "when pigs fly." And wizarding folk do still swear by Merlin. I wonder if there's a hint there that Hogwarts isn't located in the Highlands, but somewhere in South Western Scotland, near one of Merlin's old haunts. Any railway buffs out there who could say if there's a disused line going through anywhere suitable as a route for the Hogwarts Express? hwyl Ffred From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 14:57:13 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 14:57:13 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152607 > > > > Lanval: > > Frankly, I think Lupin's attitude can be interpreted in a number > > of ways. He clearly does not approve of what's going on, but the > > frown might just as well be a kind of "don't-get-me-in-trouble- > > guys-you-know-as-prefect-I-shouldn't-let-this happen..." reaction. > > Personally I've never seen this as a sign of deep sympathy for > > Snape. Let's remember Snape was spying on Lupin and his friends. > > Why would Lupin have any sort of friendly feelings for a boy who > > might destroy what little future he had? > > Leslie41: > > It's not so much a matter of Lupin having "friendly" feelings for > Snape, as much as him really hating the fact that his friends are so > malicious. For example, it's not evident that Lily likes Snape. > She tells James "you're as bad as he is." But she doesn't like the > fact that James is such a nasty piece of business. That he picks on > people just because he can (this is her interpretation, with which I > agree). She would defend anyone in that situation. As Lupin would > be bothered no matter who was being turned upside down. You're right, that's entirely possible. As I said, until we get Lupin's exact thoughts on the matter, it's all speculation. *I* just tend to think that while he knew what his friends were doing was very wrong, he would not have felt much for Severus personally -- given their history of animosity, which is by now in its fifth year. I've seen people actually say that Lupin is the most culpable of the four here, precisely because he realizes it's wrong and he ought to speak up, both from his obligation as prefect, and from a moral standpoint. I'm not sure what to argue against that, though I don't fully agree -- yet there's a certain truth to it, and an inconvenient one at that. Perhaps because I'm rather a Lupin-like person, and I might not have spoken up either. Which is why I admire Lily very much in this scene. > Leslie41: > Well, okay. But we don't know exactly what he did, so it's hard > to. Murder? Maybe. But it isn't stated. Torture? Ditto. I'm > not trying to defend the fact that Snape was a Death Eater. I just > don't know precisely what he did. We know about many murders > committed by Voldemort's followers. Some of them have have been > blatantly described to us. Voldemort, Bellatrix, Pettigrew, etc. > Snape's position as a D.E. is left just a bit vague, I think > purposefully. Lanval: Well, I have so far not seen a *good* DE. The ones on the tower in HBP are not familiar to us, yet they waste no time being very bad. The only possibly good, or perhaps *not so bad* DE is Regulus, and he's dead for precisely that reason. Snape on the other hand seems to have made it pretty far up the ranks, didn't he? I can't see him getting to that position by making tea and cookies for the gang after a little torture gig. But again, I agree it's speculation until we know. As are a lot of things. I merely thought that if you were going to speculate about Black's hateful treatment of students other than Snape (for which there is no evidence at all -- playing pranks on people can't really be compared with the much more malicious way he treats Snape), and allow that to enter into the discussion, then Snape's DE days are fair game as well. > Leslie41: > I'm not saying we should disregard it at all, but that wasn't the > way the discussion was heading. I am a person who thinks that Snape > is Dumbledore's man. Snape was in the Death Eaters, did damage > therein (some of it made plain to us, some not, etc.), but according > to Dumbledore repented of his former actions, and has repeatedly > risked his life and sacrificed much for the side of good, including > saving Harry's life. The problem as I see it with Sirius Black is > that he never repented of his actions, and stubbornly maintained > that Snape 'deserved' what Sirius doled out. Lanval: He said that once, right? To me that sounded more like Sirius opening his big mouth and being stubborn and too childish to admit that he'd done wrong. I very much doubt he REALLY, truly wishes for Snape to have died. After all, that would have meant, at best, expulsion for Lupin, if not imprisonment or execution. And at another point he does agree that they were *berks*, right? Wish I had the books at hand... > > > Lanval: > > > > Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder. He's guilty of > > telling a nosy kid, who had a mind to get four other boys > > expelled, the way into a secret passage. It was Snape's own > > decision to enter. > > Leslie41: > I predict many detectives and lawsuits in your future. Lanval: Huh?? > > What business did Snape have spying on Lupin, when he knew that > > Dumbledore must have sanctioned whatever went on? > > Leslie41: > None. Doesn't mean you want to go and deliberately get the guy > killed. As for the spying part, well Harry Potter himself bears a > striking resemblence to Snape regarding his investigation into areas > that bear Dumbledore's sanction. Lanval: Harry's breaking of the rules does not excuse Snape. But if we're going to bring Harry into it... I would argue that Harry must break a lot of rules for the simple reason of keeping the plot interesting. But can you point out an occasion of Harry spying on anyone for purely malicious reasons, as Snape did with the Marauders? I can't recall one right now, though I may be wrong. > Leslie41: > Oh, I don't think Snape is innocent by any means. And I don't think > Black is evil. I *like* Sirius Black. As I said in a previous > post, I tend to give all the characters a good deal of slack. My > point is that people seem very willing to indict Snape for his > behaviors (or even *invent* nasty things he's done), when other > characters do things that are just as, or far more blameworthy. But > (IMHO) because those other characters are charismatic, or handsome, > or well-liked, they don't seem to have to bear the responsibility or > the blame for their actions the way Snape does. They're given > a "pass". Not fair. Just not fair. Lanval: That's funny -- because Snape seems to me, in online fandom at least, the absolute King of Excused, Defended, and Unfairly Praised characters. Sirius on the other hand appears to be catching huge amounts of flak, mostly from Snape fans. As for handsome or charismatic characters getting a pass: if that were true for me, then I would be bending over backwards to defend Tom Riddle as well. Not going to happen. I feel for teenage Snape. The Pensieve scene is very, very ugly. I just happened to listen to it on tape the other day, and was struck again by how nasty it was, somehow hearing it struck me as worse as when I first read it. But I refuse to condemn James, or Sirius, on this one twenty minute account. My heart bleeds for Snape the child (if his childhood was indeed as miserable as JKR seems to suggest). But nor more than for little Neville, Harry, or, yes, Sirius, who probably had a rough time as well. > >big snip of a well reasoned argument< > But yet, in all that, everyone still seems to think Snape behaved > terribly, that he "didn't listen to the evidence". It wasn't his > job to listen to the evidence, first of all. And the trial had > already taken place. Sirius Black was a condemned murderer. It was > Snape's job to capture him. ("How I hoped I would be the one to > *catch* you") he says. Second of all, when the evidence for Black's > innocence is revealed, Snape doesn't hear it because he's > unconscious. So what, pray tell, did he do that was so wrong? Lanval: Only this: if Harry, a thirteen year old child, can muster enough control over his emotions to allow the man he believes responsible for his parents' death to speak, and tell his side of the story, then so can Snape. But no, it was revenge and Order of Merlin all the way. And to correct one thing: Sirius was never a *convicted murderer*. That would have required a trial. > > > Leslie41: > > At this point, Dumbledore never even attempts to tell Snape that > Black is innocent. What Dumbledore, in fact, tells Harry and > Hermione is that "there is not a shred of proof to support Black's > story," admitting as well that "the word of two thirteen-year-old > wizards will not convince anybody". No one, NO ONE is going to be > inclined to believe Harry and Hermione. At this point, why should > Snape? > Lanval: Because it's Albus Dumbledore who speaks for Sirius. Snape of all people ought to know about second chances. Again -- DDM!Snape should have full trust in Dumbledore's decisions. At the very least he should have kept his mouth shut, given Sirius the benefit of the doubt, and later demanded an explanation. > Much later, in OotP, Snape has obviously been briefed on Black's > innocence and accepts it, even to the point of shaking hands with > him. > Lanval: Yes, no doubt feeling deepest remorse that he ever wanted Sirius to be Kissed. *evil grin* Pure speculation on my part, of course. From mandorino222 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 15:18:05 2006 From: mandorino222 at yahoo.com (mandorino222) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 15:18:05 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152608 Pippin: Draco's success, despite having a teacher who is far more sadistic than Snape, shows us what JKR had already told us herself:the reason for Harry's failure to learn occlumency was that he's just not equipped for it. Snape might as well have tried to teach a giraffe to sing. The antipathy between Snape and Harry made each think the other was not trying, but they were both wrong. Nick: I think this has something to do with Harry's Gryffindorish nature. Rowling has already said that the four houses are stalking horses for the four elements of the Greek Esoteric tradition: Fire, Air, Earth, and Water (you figure it out). Water's main characteristic is secrecy, thus making Syltherins (Draco, Bellatrix, Snape, Voldemort) good at Occulmency. Fire's main characteristic is hot-headedness, making Gryffindors (Harry) bad at it. The same hot headedness is probably what makes him so good at throwing off the Imperius curse. However, I think Rowling leaves the door open. Snape does call Bellatrix "Aunt Bellatrix", indicating a much more secure and friendly learning environment (despite Bella's somewhat violent tendencies) than Harry had with Snape. Potentially a new teacher could yield better results, even one not as good at occulmency as Snape. In fact, teachers that are good at their subjects often make terrible teachers because so much of the subject is intuitive that they have a difficult time explaining it to minds less attuned. From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 15:08:36 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 15:08:36 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152609 Ceridwen: > The Prank seems to play some important part in the backstory leading > up to the Potters' death, the temporary vanquishment of LV, Snape's > damaged emotions, in fact, the entire underlying base of the story > that we're reading. I sincerely hope there is something more to it > than merely a schoolboy prank gone wrong. I hope we learn everything > about it in book 7, because it does seem to be important to the > current events. Until then, all we have is speculation based on how > we each interpret the characters and surrounding events. > > Dang, that's disappointing! Lanval: Thank you for this excellent analysis; it's a superbly balanced and well-thought out explanation, and I agree on all points. Though I would add, about the 'escalating war': at other times it may well have been Snape who started it. It does say somewhere that Snape gave as good as he got, no? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 16:24:09 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 16:24:09 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152610 > Leslie41: > Well, Black deliberately tricks Snape into going to the whomping > willow when Lupin is in full werewolf mode. James is the one who > stops Snape, because he realizes that Snape will most likely be > killed. Dumbledore tells Harry that Snape owed James Potter a "life > debt" after that. Meaning that James had saved his life. So yeah, > I would call what Sirius Black does attempted murder. Alla: Could you prove to me that Black WANTED to kill Snape, not just scare him? Because I don't remember anything supporting that in canon. Alla: > > There must be a reason why Snape assigns Harry class exactly the > > same essay that he wrote and we KNOW why he assigns the essay ? to > > point who Remus was, could it be that he learned about who Remus > > was under the similar circumstances and went into the Shack > > thinking to try his hand in disposing of the dark creature, since > > he liked DADA so much? > > Leslie41: > You're really *really* reaching now. There's not a shred of > evidence for this, and it makes no sense. Alla: Evidence? OF course not, but that is my whole point. There is no evidence to prove ANYTHING with certainty as to what occured that night. What I am trying to show you that there are possible HINTS in canon that could be interpreted that way. I did not invent the SAME werewolf essay showing up TWICE in the most critical moments of the books, especially in the Pensieve scene. COuld it be that the "gun is there to shoot" at one point? I think si personally. > > Could it be that this is why Dumbledore made Snape shut up about > > the events of the prank so easily? Not because of Dumbledore > > favoring Gryffindors or any other fanfiction staff, but because > > Snape actually was mixed in the events of that night in NOT a good > > way. > > Leslie41: > Erm, again, no evidence for this. Alla: Same thing - no evidence, just extreme wierdness of Snape NOT saying anything about Remus' condition. And we SEE in PoA how Snape could care less about public ranting when he feels that he was being , I don't know, suffered a big dissapointment? Why didn't Snape go to the Governors with this discovery? Why? I believe DD threatened him with something, I could be wrong of course, but I can be right too. > Leslie41: > Well, show me the evidence and I'll consider it. But you won't get > far on pointless, unsupported speculation, especially when that > speculation tends to contradict the accepted facts. > Alla: And again - this is my point. There ARE not enough facts, that is my speculation does not contradict ANY of them, IMO > Lanval: > > > But we DO know quite well what the Death Eaters > > were up to at the time. They were going around > > murdering and torturing. > [snip} > > Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder. > > He's guilty of telling a nosy kid, who had a mind > > to get four other boys expelled, the way into a > > secret passage. > > houyhnhnm: > > Snape may not have been into murdering and torturing himself and he > may not even have actually participated in any such acts, but by > joining the Death Eaters (as a late adolescent)he became responsible > for acts they carried out whether he participated or not. He is > responsible for the deaths of James and Lily Potter because he > reported the contents of the prophecy to Voldemort, even though he may > not have foreseen such a consequence and never wanted them to die. > > Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder because he was just a > high-spirited prankster afflicted with a teenage brain that could not > foresee the consequences of his act. He didn't really want Snape to die. > > So: > People are responsible for the unintended consequences of their actions. > Or > People are not responsible for the unintended consequences of their > actions. > Which is it? > This is what bothers me about the arguments of the anti-Snapists on > this list. > Alla: Hmmmm. Can not speak for Lanval, but that is certainly not my argument. Mine goes something like that - Snape joined the gang of racists, torturers and murderers. EVERYBODY in that gang whom we know of is guilty of making people die at one point of their lifes. The full blown DEs I mean, not just the informers in MoM, etc. To me it makes absolutely no sense to say that Snape somehow was a lucky exception of that rule and was somehow excused or something from killing people either with Avada or poisons or anything else. SO, it is not that Snape is Guilty by association, Snape is guilty because it is IMO much more likely than not that he did kill people. If you can show me that Snape never killed, tortured , poisoned people while being in Voldemort's employ, I will absolutely say that he is not responsible for the acts of other DE, just for his own, but I think he has plenty of blood on his hands, NOT just by association. > Pippin: > Are you saying that Draco was able to learn occlumency > from Bella because she's so genuinely gentle and trustworthy and kind? > So very, very sane? Alla: No, Pippin, Draco IMO was able to learn Occlumency from Bella because crasy as she is he trusts her, her being a family member and all that. > Leslie41: > Oh, I don't think Snape is innocent by any means. And I don't think > Black is evil. I *like* Sirius Black. As I said in a previous > post, I tend to give all the characters a good deal of slack. My > point is that people seem very willing to indict Snape for his > behaviors (or even *invent* nasty things he's done), when other > characters do things that are just as, or far more blameworthy. But > (IMHO) because those other characters are charismatic, or handsome, > or well-liked, they don't seem to have to bear the responsibility or > the blame for their actions the way Snape does. They're given > a "pass". Not fair. Just not fair. Alla: Consider another possibility if you may. I see Snape as the one who did all those nasty things and I am just AS surprised and very honestly so that no matter how many nasty things Snape does, the explanation is found that Snape is really the good guy and the hero. I mean, when I read HBP I was pretty sure that there can be NO defense for Snape committing murder of Albus Dumbledore. I thought hey, this IS the ultimately nasty thing for which Snape cannot be defended. Boy, was I proven wrong. Do I have any problem with it? Of course not, it is all the fun to blame the characters, to defend them, etc. What I completely disagree with is that Snape gets blamed for "invented" nasty things. I think he had done PLENTY of "real" ones. JMO, Alla From lwalsh at acsalaska.net Sun May 21 16:30:34 2006 From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 08:30:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] What did Neville Forget? (was Re: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152611 >"That's it!" he yells and the boy behind the toy piano does a backflip. > >What if the reason why Bellatrix was sent to the Longbottoms was to >fetch a horcrux that the Longbottoms had! The thing that Neville >cannot remember is the actual horcrux that his parent's had. What if >his mommy was trying to tell him something at St. Mungos. This could >be the last horcrux found in book seven. This would allow Neville to >provide the last bit of help that Harry needs to defeat Voldemort. >This would parallel the storyline in book one when Neville gives >Gryffindor the last few points that they need to win the house cup! > >What do you guys think? > >Red Eye Randy I think JKR has discounted that Mrs. Longbottom was trying to tell Neville anything at St. Mungos, but I like your idea, nonetheless. I have thought for a long time that Neville's bad memory is a symptom of the result of some curse or spell put on him. And that eventually Neville's memory will somehow be restored. Do we know what house Neville's parent were in when they were at Hogwarts? Laura W -- Laura Walsh lwalsh at acsalaska.net http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com From oppen at mycns.net Sun May 21 16:38:07 2006 From: oppen at mycns.net (ericoppen) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 16:38:07 -0000 Subject: My own take on the Prank Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152612 I have said before, and think it is time to repeat, that my own belief is that Sirius was guilty, not of attempted murder, but of familiarity---in this case, with a werewolf---breeding contempt for the danger involved. Sirius had been hangin' with a werewolf for years, and with his Animagism, _he_ was in no danger. Being sixteen or so, he didn't think to remember that Snape (AFAWK) was/is _NOT_ a Animagus, and would be in terrible danger from a werewolf. An analogy I'm fond of runs as follows: Let us say that I, at age sixteen, was an absolutely superb horseman---there was nothing at all on four hooves I couldn't ride; I had shelves-full of trophies from rodeos and equestrian events, and was on the short-list for the Olympic equestrian team. And let us also say that I had someone in my life who was an utter, total PITA---who'd been a stone in my shoe from Day One. (Unlike the horsemanship, this is something I _did_ have.) Had I been the superb rider I describe above, I could see my sixteen- year-old self inducing the PITA to ride a dangerous buckin' bronco..."of course it isn't dangerous---I do it all the time! _Anybody_ can do that! But he'll get a nasty scare, and won't it just serve him right?" The idea that the PITA is _not_ a horseman on that level, and might well be injured or killed, might not occur to me. And we know Snape's not really rational on the subject of Sirius Black. For all we know, Black and Potter, Sr. _were_ punished, but I think anything short of being shot at dawn by a firing squad wouldn't have made Snape happy. I should also point out that one reason DD may not have come down as hard on the Marauders as Snape would have wanted was because Snape, whatever his motivations, _was_ miles out of line, sneaking into the Shrieking Shack. From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 15:41:00 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 15:41:00 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152613 > houyhnhnm: > Snape may not have been into murdering and torturing himself and > he may not even have actually participated in any such acts, but > by joining the Death Eaters (as a late adolescent)he became > responsible for acts they carried out whether he participated or > not. He is responsible for the deaths of James and Lily Potter > because he reported the contents of the prophecy to Voldemort, > even though he may not have foreseen such a consequence and never > wanted them to die. > > Sirius Black is not guilty of attempted murder because he was > just a high-spirited prankster afflicted with a teenage brain that > could not foresee the consequences of his act. He didn't really > want Snape to die. Lanval: Big difference for me. Sirius only had to blurt out the instructions on how to get past the Whomping Willow, in a moment of utter frustration with Spying Severus. Not saying it happened that way, but again, no solid evidence yet. Snape on the other hand joined the DEs. That requires thought, intent, and conscious decision-making. Besides, he was a few years older. The DEs were a gang of murderers, terrorists, torturers -- that's canon. I see no reason to believe Snape did NOT participate. Especially since it was not a huge organization. LV seems to have had a fairly good idea of what everybody was doing. There's little reason to believe Snape could have flown under the radar, as it were. And no, I don't hold Snape entirely responsible for the Potters' deaths. I need to hear more evidence that he truly realized what the consequences would be. I'm willing to cut him some slack for taking the message to LV, and not realizing right away what it would mean (though, really, what did he THINK would happen?) > So: > People are responsible for the unintended consequences of their > actions. > Or > People are not responsible for the unintended consequences of their > actions. > Which is it? > This is what bothers me about the arguments of the anti-Snapists on > this list. Lanval: Funny story here... I recall reading this list several months ago, and coming across the argument that Snape was just too young, reckless, and generally too naive, when he decided to take the prophecy to LV... and I remember laughing and thinking, whoa, isn't that the line of reasoning that Snape-Fans insist CANNOT be used as an excuse for anything Sirius Black has ever done? That he is solely personally responsible for anything from Snape joining the DE to his own death? So you see it cuts both ways -- and it's unlike to change. We'll just, as the cliche goes, have to agree to disagree, on who gets treated most unfairly. *g* From glykonix at yahoo.com Sun May 21 16:31:27 2006 From: glykonix at yahoo.com (Adriana) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 16:31:27 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152614 Lanval said: > And while we're talking Sirius and Snape, and compare accumulated > sins, we should remember that Snape really DID try to have Sirius > (and possibly Lupin!) killed at the end of POA -- worse, Kissed by a > Dementor -- without a trial, without listening to the evidence. Even > after he is told that Sirius is innocent, he throws a spittle- flying > tantrum for not getting his way. And if Snape is DDM all the way... > what reason would he have to doubt Dumbledore? > > Lanval, who's torn between being supremely baffled and highly > amused, having read the recent Sexy!Snape posts... > Glykonix: Yes you're right while we're talking Sirius and Snape why not bring up the end of POA. I clearly remember Black taking special care that Snape bump his lolling head on the low ceiling, while I also remember that when Snape regained consciousness, he conjured stretchers and lifted the limp forms of Harry, Hermione, and Black onto them. A fourth stretcher with Ron already floating at his side. And took them all to the castle. And he did ask for a reason to kill him, not that he didn't have enough. Not that he would have been questioned if he killed Black, he would have been a hero. He was going to do the `right' thing at least from the MOM point of view. Black and Lupin didn't have these reservations when they were about to kill Peter. I still think it was extremely stupid of them not to wake Snape up, they could have tied him up and listen to the whole thing, I really don't think he would have been that irrational if he had actually known what had happened, and I'm sure Peter wouldn't have escaped but of course if Peter hadn't escaped there wouldn't have been any Moldyvoldy return the next year. And you might have been supremely baffled and highly amused, after having read the recent Sexy!Snape posts, but my inner Pansy has had a blast reading them. Glykonix From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 21 16:53:44 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 16:53:44 -0000 Subject: Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152615 > > Pippin: > > > > The marriage was made as soon as the partners gave free consent > > > > in a recognized way...and the law in 1926 did not recognize > > > persuasion by means other than force as coercion. Gerry: > Which is what Merope did. She used force. Pippin: What they meant by force in 1926 was that the person marrying had given consent in order to escape a threat rather than because he or she desired to be married. I don't think that applies. The concept of duress was expanded eventually to include the idea that someone might be compelled, even without his or her knowledge, to fail to apply his or her mind to the question of giving consent. There was an Irish decision about that -- in 1978. Now IMO what happened in 1978 was not that people suddenly discovered that there was a way to apply such pressure. People had been doing that all along. In earlier times they thought it was done by magic. Later they thought it might be done by drugs. The US Food and Drug Administration was studying that as late as the 1980's. What had changed, IMO, was the willingness to consider that pressure a form of duress. Now, would wizards have considered it a form of duress? They consider Imperius a form of duress, true, but Imperius forces you to obey even if you know you don't want to. Harry knows he doesn't want to jump but the curse still forces him to do it. He does give his mind to the question of consent, but he can't force his body to obey him. That's different from the way the love potion works, so it's not clear to me that wizards at the time would look at it the same way. We might consider the legend of Tristan and Isolde. I don't think I've ever heard anyone claim that if Isolde and King Mark had taken their love potion as was intended, it would have made their marriage invalid! Or even that Isolde was less an adulteress (though undoubtedly a more sympathetic one) because she was under the influence of a potion. The whole tragedy turns on the fact that the law took no notice of human desire. That hadn't changed very much in 1926. Pippin From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun May 21 17:22:13 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 17:22:13 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152616 > Alla: > > Um, my point is that Harry does not trust Snape because he was > abusive towards him, which in my book is perfectly understandable > whether or not Harry has a problem with abusive teachers in general. > a_svirn: It would have been if Snape *had* been abusive towards Harry. The thing is, he hadn't. Your description of abuse as "taking away students' self-esteem" is somewhat unorthodox to begin with, but even if we accept it for the sake of this argument, it wasn't *Harry* who suffered from Snape's "abuse". It was Neville's and Hermione's self-esteem that suffered from his humiliating remarks. Harry's self-esteem wasn't really affected. He has hated Snape from the very first lesson, because Snape made it abundantly clear that he hated Harry. Harry might not have known the cause of this hatred then, but he knew hatred when he encountered it. And reciprocated. Perfectly sensible, but nothing to do with abuse. Also Snape was by no means the only teacher who affected Neville this way. McGonagall used to be every bit as insulting and mean towards Neville in the first three books. What's more, she abused her position of power when she stripped Neville of all privileges he was entitled to as a third-year and a Gryffindor for something that wasn't his fault (and well she knew it!) Harry might have pitied Neville (but not much) but it didn't occur to him to suspect McGonagall in being in league with Voldemort, did it? From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Sun May 21 17:26:52 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 17:26:52 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152617 Lanval: > > Snape may not have been into murdering and torturing himself and he > > may not even have actually participated in any such acts, but by > > joining the Death Eaters (as a late adolescent)he became > responsible > > for acts they carried out whether he participated or not. He is > > responsible for the deaths of James and Lily Potter because he > > reported the contents of the prophecy to Voldemort, even though he > may > > not have foreseen such a consequence and never wanted them to die. Alla: > If you can show me that Snape never killed, tortured , poisoned > people while being in Voldemort's employ, I will absolutely say that > he is not responsible for the acts of other DE, just for his own, > but I think he has plenty of blood on his hands, NOT just by > association. Ceridwen: I have the iron heating up, right beside the oven door. This will be my fourth post. We are beginning to have some canon for Snape 'slithering out of things' with the DEs. In 'Spinner's End', Bellatrix says, twice that I can find off-hand: (page 29, US hardcover Scholastic) "But not by you!" said Bellatrix furiously. "No, you were once again absent while the rest of us ran dangers, were you not, Snape?" (page 35, same) "Aren't you listening, Narcissa? Oh, he'll *try*, I'm sure... The usual empty words, the usual slithering out of action... oh, on the Dark Lord's orders, of course!" (emphasis JKR's) Bellatrix may be indulging in some hyperbole, but she has the idea that Snape gets out of things. How often he really does, how often he was absent while the other DEs ran dangers, we don't know. It could just be a matter of degree, or times in the thick of things, which Bellatrix's anger converts to 'the usual'. There must be some basis in truth, even if she's going over the top. But, we just don't know enough to say for sure one way or another. If JKR explains even half of what I hope she does in book 7, it will be larger than a library edition dictionary! Ceridwen. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 21 17:49:48 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 17:49:48 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152619 > > Lanval: > > Only this: if Harry, a thirteen year old child, can muster enough > control over his emotions to allow the man he believes responsible > for his parents' death to speak, and tell his side of the story, > then so can Snape. But no, it was revenge and Order of Merlin all > the way. > > And to correct one thing: Sirius was never a *convicted murderer*. > That would have required a trial. Pippin: Harry did not "allow" Sirius to speak. Lupin, who was armed, insisted on the whole story being told over the objections of both Ron and Sirius himself. Harry was willing to listen once Lupin returned his wand, but he wondered whether it was a trick. Of course he didn't know about non-verbal spells or legilimency -- he hadn't even mastered the shield charm or learned to resist the Imperius curse. If Lupin and Sirius had had the skills of Death Eater hit wizards, Harry's wand wouldn't have been much use. Sirius was indeed convicted. He was sentenced to Azkaban by Crouch's tribunal, admittedly without a trial, and later sentenced to the dementor's kiss, also without a trial. Snape had no authority to put aside those decisions. Dumbledore, who was apparently head of the Wizengamot at the time of PoA, said there was no way to convince anyone without Peter, alive or dead. Dumbledore believed Sirius -- but he is a far greater legilimens than Snape, who could not break through even Draco's defenses. Dumbledore never tells Snape that he believes Black's story -- he only insists that he needs to speak to Harry and Hermione alone. Snape does not know the upshot of that conversation, and so he does not know that Dumbledore has approved of Harry helping Black to escape. Dumbledore is obviously not in a position to say so in front of Fudge. But he hints very strongly, "Unless you are suggesting that Harry and Hermione are able to be in two places at once, I'm afraid I don't see any point in troubling them further." Since Snape's classes were some of the ones that Hermione was doubling, and since even the boys noticed that she didn't always manage to synch her appearances and disappearances, it would be out of character for Snape not to have noticed, even if he hadn't actually been told that Miss Granger had been issued a time turner. It was also no secret that Hermione had signed up for everything, and Snape as a Head of House should know how that was arranged. And what does Snape do? He shuts up and walks away. Pippin From belviso at attglobal.net Sun May 21 17:54:09 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 13:54:09 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] My own take on the Prank/Snape Abuse References: Message-ID: <00ad01c67cff$90458e20$d8b4400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152620 Sticking my own toe into the waters here, I think the main thing about all the issues about Snape is that they're really impossible to find a simple answer to because it's all a mess, often a mess that comes from peoples' (and so characters') tendencies to a) exaggerate the foresight and evil intentions of the people who do them wrong b) see their own justifications clearly and c) have a hard time being objective or separating their feelings from the facts. With Snape and Harry, for instance, I don't consider what Snape does to Harry or Neville child abuse. (I don't think either boy does either.) What Snape can be said to sometimes abuse is his power as a teacher. Alla made a good call in pointing out Harry noting Snape's "gift" for keeping the class in control. That's a function of presence and JKR I think characterizes that clearly in canon by focusing on Snape's physical presence. He and McGonagall naturally control students just by entering a room. When Harry first enters the classroom he is in good faith ready to enter into a normal teacher/student relationship where regardless of what he thought about Snape personally he'd respect him as a teacher. Snape throws this away when he starts picking on Harry, imo. It's one of the ironies of Snape. He has more power over Harry before he starts abusing his position. Then he reveals himself to be a bad leader not worthy of respect; Harry "sees through him" to the teenager he was (I think this is a big issue with Hagrid too). He shows weakness in his need to take jabs at Harry. When he destroys Harry's potion, for instance, he just looks someone trying to get at Harry and Harry naturally responds to him not as a teacher but as a bully trying to get to him--not surprisingly that jab at Harry is in response to the Pensieve scene. Snape probably literally feels again like a teenager and he acts like one. It goes over the line a little even for Snape. Harry picks up on this and acts in kind, sometimes finding it impossible to treat Snape like a teacher when he acts like a child. When Harry calls Snape "Snape" and others correct him that it's "Professor Snape" I don't think Harry is always intentionally being rude. He just really thinks of him as Snape for good psychological reasons. Actually, it's a great little character hook for Snape that he's constantly trying to get people to call him and so see him as the thing he has created himself to be; they continue to see him as something less impressive that they see. Harry calls him Snape; Lupin calls him Severus. Of course it's also canon that Harry has other reasons that he hates Snape that Snape has not earned. Harry can't stand the idea of Snape having helped him, he likes thinking Snape is the one most responsible for things like Sirius' death etc. Snape started all of this but at this point it's a mess that Harry contributes to himself--not by doing stuff to Snape, usually, but just by feeding his own hatred of the man. I think Snape in some ways continues to not only see the Harry he wants to see but create the Harry he sees. I was going to say Harry came out a little better than Snape in terms of his ability to sometimes be objective, but now I think about it I think both of them maybe see the other as the less objective. When Harry runs into Barty Crouch in the woods and runs for help it must seem to him insane that Snape is still picking on him when there's something more important at stake. But really that's probably because Snape honestly has no way of knowing Harry could be bringing real serious information to the castle that night. He assumes it's just nothing. Similarly Snape may find times when he can't believe Harry is still concentrating on the petty things when there's something more serious at stake, not realizing that Harry has no way of knowing that this is one of those times Snape's going to have his priorities straight. In terms of the Prank, we really don't know all the details yet. I've always definitely been of the opinon that it's wrong to call it attempted murder because I really don't think Sirius would ever plan something like that and I think canon indicates he wasn't planning anything more than a vague "teach him a lesson" situation. Probably he just wanted to see him running scared. If he were going to plan a murder it would be in response to a situation like Peter--he's driven by different things. Had Snape been killed it probably would have been something like manslaughter. Sirius would still be responsible and guilty, but I truly think that what makes the Prank so messy is that it's not anything so clear cut as Sirius attempting murder. That may actually be all the more painful for Snape, that he wasn't even worthy of attempted murder; he would have died through a joke gone wrong. For someone like Snape who craves respect that's got to be awful (not to mention he'd have contributed to his own death when his own attempts at snooping and petty fighting with MWPP helped get him killed). We are apparently going to learn more about the Prank but I suspect what we learn may come out of left field and throw light on things in a totally different way that we expected. It may make things more complicated, not less. That just seems to often be the way things work. I don't think what we'll learn will be who's fault it really was, because it's really more just the natural collision of a lot of stuff that was already going on. -m From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 18:01:32 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 18:01:32 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152621 > Ceridwen: > Then you are taking the extreme position here in order to argue > and expose various points? In a manner of speaking, I guess. I teach argument for a living. And my own position is not as polarized as one might think. Your argument about Sirius and his role in the prank is very plausible, I think. "Attempted murder" may be too strong a term. Perhaps "attempted criminally negligent homicide?" "Attempted manslaughter?" However we might interpret the nature of the "crime", Sirius deliberately tried to put Snape in harm's way, harm that could have led to his death. And Snape owes Potter a "life debt" as a result. > Lanval: > I've seen people actually say that Lupin is the most culpable of > the four here, precisely because he realizes it's wrong and he > ought to speak up, both from his obligation as prefect, and from a > moral standpoint. I'm not sure what to argue against that, though > I don't fully agree -- yet there's a certain truth to it, and an > inconvenient one at that. Leslie41: That's an interesting perspective. Lupin should have spoken up and I think he knows it. But as Rowling says, he desperately wants to be liked. Lupin also, with regard to Black's status as an animagus, calls himself a "coward". But who of us cannot sympathize with him and with his reasons? > > Leslie41: > > As for the spying part, well Harry Potter himself bears a > > striking resemblence to Snape regarding his investigation into > > areas that bear Dumbledore's sanction. > Lanval: > Harry's breaking of the rules does not excuse Snape. But if we're > going to bring Harry into it... I would argue that Harry must break > a lot of rules for the simple reason of keeping the plot > interesting. Leslie41: "Keeping the plot interesting" does not constitute a defense of the character's actions morally. It's a cop out. > Lanval: > Snape seems to me, in online fandom at least, the absolute King of > Excused, Defended, and Unfairly Praised characters. Sirius on the > other hand appears to be catching huge amounts of flak, mostly > from Snape fans. Leslie41: Well, as I believe there is ample evidence that Snape is DDM, I would say that what Snape is doing as a double agent is arguably the most dangerous and demanding job possible. Not to mention his repeated healing of DD, saving of Harry, etc. etc. etc. How is, then, praise of him "unfair?" Black doesn't do nearly as much for the Order, for DD, or for Harry for that matter. As for "excusing" his time as a Death Eater, I don't "excuse" it. I note, however, that his time there was brief, and that he has, according to DD, sorely repented of it. Repented not only in word, but in action, by serving in the order and spying on Voldemort. When DD says "Snape is no more a Death Eater than I am," I believe him. I don't have any precise antipathy towards Black, and don't intend to give him "flack," but it seems to me that Snape Haters seem to like him quite a bit, and I don't think the facts support that assessment. > Lanval: > I feel for teenage Snape. The Pensieve scene is very, very ugly. I > just happened to listen to it on tape the other day, and was struck > again by how nasty it was, somehow hearing it struck me as worse as > when I first read it. But I refuse to condemn James, or Sirius, on > this one twenty minute account. Leslie41: Well, it depends on what you want to condemn them of. Certainly that's not the incident in which we can accuse Black of attempting to get Snape eaten by a werewolf. But boy, those boys are nasty. Mean and malicious and nasty, taking great pains to hunt down and publicly humiliate a fellow student who, at that point, is just keeping to himself. I would condemn James and Sirius for being arrogant, thieving, self- important, malicious a-holes, whose great joy in life is taken in socially eviscerating the less popular and less attractive just because they CAN. Did they stay that way? Probably not. Lily, who I have great respect for just on the basis of that scene, came around to falling in love with James, and I would think that it must have been he who changed, not her, because I find it hard to believe she would have married him if he didn't. Sirius, of course, is broken by Azkaban, and he's lost his looks, but he's still got a strong streak of arrogance and meanness in him. > Lanval: > if Harry, a thirteen year old child, can muster enough > control over his emotions to allow the man he believes responsible > for his parents' death to speak, and tell his side of the story, > then so can Snape. But no, it was revenge and Order of Merlin all > the way. Leslie41: And again, I remind you that Dumbledore himself said no one would listen to Harry, or believe him. Snape only believed what any other wizard would have. And did what any other wizard (save DD) would have done. I don't think we can condemn Snape for his reaction. Harry deserves praise for his openmindedness, and it speaks extremely well of him. But it doesn't speak poorly of the rest of the wizarding world that they wouldn't have done the same. *I* certainly wouldn't have. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun May 21 18:05:36 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 18:05:36 -0000 Subject: Slight-OT: Hogworts, Plus Dragon Blood (was: Wordplay...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152622 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Najwa wrote: > > > > Hogwarts is a flower isn't it? ... I don't see why > > a school should be named after a flower unless there is some deep > > meaning behind that flower, which I'm sure someone will tell me that > > there is. ... > > Carol responds: > Good catch. The plant is actually spelled "Hogswort," which JKR would > probably consider an amusing name ..., especially in connection with > warthogs. Put the two together and you have "Hogwarts," certainly an > odd name for a school of any sort. ...edited... > bboyminn: I believe the story goes like this. JKR had been to the Botanical Gardens several years earlier with a friend, and it was there that she saw the name 'Hogworts' and mentally put it on file. Much later she decided to name the magic school 'Hogwarts', and it was then that her friend reminded her where she had seen this name before. Finding character and place names for fiction is not an easy task. You would think it would be easy though, 'I'll call this one George, that one Fred, and the other one Harry'; but sorry that isn't the case. You can troll for countless hours through baby name databases, maps (Dusley & Snape came from maps), slave name databases, Scotish Clan databases and maps, databases of famous English, Irish, and Russian poets and authors, product brand names (I named a character after a cigarette-Dunhill), movie and TV credits, and countless other sources. In some sense, every character (and Place) already has a name, as an author, you don't make it up, you seek to discover what it is. When you finally do discover it, you know it's right. If you search Google for 'hogworts', you will find several references to Croton capitatus Michx, also known as Doveweed, Hogweed, Hogwort, and woolly croton. Here are a few - http://www.forestryimages.org/browse/subthumb.cfm?sub=5388&start=1 http://plants.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=CRCA6 http://www.itis.usda.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=28266 Interestingly, there is a plant called "Dragon's Blood" - http://botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/d/dragon20.html Maybe the 12 uses of Dragon's Blood is not really the 12 uses of DRAGON's Blood. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Sun May 21 18:14:53 2006 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 18:14:53 -0000 Subject: HP Chat - How to get in! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152623 Please IM hpfgu_chat. I will then add you to the conversation. From zgirnius at yahoo.com Sun May 21 18:24:21 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 18:24:21 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152624 > Lanval: > And no, I don't hold Snape entirely responsible for the Potters' > deaths. I need to hear more evidence that he truly realized what the > consequences would be. I'm willing to cut him some slack for taking > the message to LV, and not realizing right away what it would mean > (though, really, what did he THINK would happen?) zgirnius: Harry was shown the Prophecy by Dumbledore at the end of OotP. His reaction was that Voldemort should have kept an eye on all children born towards the end of July to qualifying parents. To wait and see if any of them do, indeed, seem to grow into a threat to him. Voldemort chose to act instead, thus creating the unique threat to him that is Harry, and making the Prophecy, to an extent, self- fulfilling. Which I only bring up to show, that there is more than one possible reaction a person could have believed Voldemort would have, especially if one did not give it a great deal of thought. And Snape might not have given it a great deal of thought, if he went and reported what he had heard soon after he heard it. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun May 21 19:00:13 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 19:00:13 -0000 Subject: My own take on the Prank In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > > I have said before, and think it is time to repeat, that my own > belief is that Sirius was guilty, not of attempted murder, but of > familiarity---in this case, with a werewolf---breeding contempt for > the danger involved. Sirius had been hangin' with a werewolf for > years, and with his Animagism, _he_ was in no danger. Being sixteen > or so, he didn't think to remember that Snape (AFAWK) was/is _NOT_ a > Animagus, and would be in terrible danger from a werewolf. > > ...edited... > > And we know Snape's not really rational on the subject of Sirius > Black. For all we know, Black and Potter, Sr. _were_ punished, but > I think anything short of being shot at dawn by a firing squad > wouldn't have made Snape happy. I should also point out that one > reason DD may not have come down as hard on the Marauders as Snape > would have wanted was because Snape, whatever his motivations, _was_ > miles out of line, sneaking into the Shrieking Shack. > bboyminn: I'm inclined to agree, too many people are injecting their own negative preceptions into this incident. First and foremost, we don't know exactly what happened and we don't know for a fact that no one was punished. First, on Sirius's action, he was young and impulsive like all 16 year olds. That doesn't excuse it, but it does help explain it. Next, we don't know exactly what Sirius said to Snape. He could have warned Snape that great danger lurked beyond the tree. Of course, to Snape, being an equally impulsive 16 year old, that would have been more of an enticement than a deterrent. I could very easily see someone as smart as Sirius warning Snape of danger as a way of covering his own butt in case anything went wrong. Second, we don't know, and I find it unlikely, that Sirius literally planned to kill Snape, or to cause his death. In his immature impulsive mind, he probably had a picture of Snape screaming like a schoolgirl and running away. Lack of Foresight and forethought, is one of the many great failings of youth. Sirius might have imagined his desired outcome, but gave very little thought to realistic and likely outcomes; again, young and impulsive. Third, no one forced Snape to go. He made a conscious decision to go against the rules, into likely danger, and with foreknowledge that he was circumventing protections put in place and endorsed by the Headmaster. Sirius did not bodily throw Snape under the tree. Snape put himself in danger. He put himself into an obvious danger, or at least into a danger that would have been obvious to anyone who had thought about it; any one other than a young, impulsive, headstrong, vengefull teen. Forth, we don't know that no one was punished. In fact, I think it VERY likely that everyone except Lupin was severly punished, but punished in the confines and context of school. Snape wasn't hurt, he went of his own freewill, so I don't really see that any school would have brought in the legal authorities in such a circumstances. Kids risk their lives all the time for a laugh. If they were going to call in the police everytime that happened they might as well move the school to the police station. If Sirius had bodily thrown Snape under the tree, we would have a very different case. But all Sirius did was pass some information on to Snape. Snape, himself, was in complete control of what he did with that information. I think Snape's real problem was probably humiliation at being made a fool of, at having to have been rescued from danger by his worst enemy, at having been so foolish as to let himself be goaded into putting himself in an obviously dangerous situation. Further, we know that Snape was a very accomplished student. It's possible that Snape was more than able to defend himself against a werewolf attack, and that it was really Lupin's life that James was saving. Again, all this is speculation, but it seems to me to be speculation that fits the facts combined with logical knowledge of youthful behavior. Final note, again based in speculation, I think it is unfathomable to think that no one was punished. That seems completely unlikely and unreasonable even from wizard world perspective. I suspect everyone including Snape was punished severly, but punished in the framework of school. In otherwords, a long series of unpleasant detentions and docking of house points. And, given that no one was hurt, that seems appropriate. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 17:07:13 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 10:07:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: My own take on the Prank In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060521170714.2587.qmail@web61322.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152626 ericoppen wrote: And we know Snape's not really rational on the subject of Sirius Black. For all we know, Black and Potter, Sr. _were_ punished, but I think anything short of being shot at dawn by a firing squad wouldn't have made Snape happy. I should also point out that one reason DD may not have come down as hard on the Marauders as Snape would have wanted was because Snape, whatever his motivations, _was_ miles out of line, sneaking into the Shrieking Shack. Joe: Yeah people always seen to forget that if the little toerag hadn't been sticking his nose into other people's affairs in the first place he couldn't have gotten hurt at all. Did Sirius go too far? Of course he did. That said, he couldn't have done it if Snape hadn't already shown that he spying on them because he was an ***hat. I think that Snape is still torqued about everything involved in that night. He's mad because Sirius read him so well and got him to put his own neck in the noose so to speak. He's also mad that James didn't have anything to do with his being in danger and that James was the one who saved him. In fact we see the scene again in some ways when Draco follows Harry, Ron and Hermione to Hagrid's hut just so he can tell McGonagall. Joe From deeblegirl at yahoo.com Sun May 21 20:32:18 2006 From: deeblegirl at yahoo.com (deeblegirl) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 20:32:18 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152627 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zgirnius" wrote: > > Lanval: > And no, I don't hold Snape entirely responsible for the Potters' > deaths. I need to hear more evidence that he truly realized what the > consequences would be. I'm willing to cut him some slack for taking > the message to LV, and not realizing right away what it would mean > (though, really, what did he THINK would happen?) Someone has probably brought this up already, but Half-Blood Prince introduced the possibility that there's something odd about the way the supposedly loyal Death Eater Snape reported the prophecy to Voldemort. Here's what Dumbledore tells Harry in OotP: -- "My -- our -- one stroke of good fortune was that the eavesdropper was detected only a short way into the prophecy and thrown from the building." "So he only heard ...?" "He heard only the first part." (Chapter Thirty-Seven, "The Lost Prophecy") -- Now, this is what we learn from Trelawney in HBP: -- "... but then we were rudely interrupted by Severus Snape!" "What?" "Yes, there was a commotion outside the door and it flew open, and there was that rather uncouth barman standing with Snape." (Chapter Twenty-Five, "The Seer Overheard") -- This new perspective on the situation seems to suggest that Snape overheard ALL of the prophecy. (One could argue that Snape couldn't make out the second half because the "uncouth barman" interrupted him, but he certainly wasn't thrown out halfway through.) So either Snape, on his own, decided to report only the first half -- or someone told him to do so. Someone who gave Harry a somewhat different spin on these events. That's moving into chessmaster!Dumbledore territory, naturally, and I don't know if I really want to see that happen. But Dumbledore's anguished reaction to the potion in the cave -- "it's all my fault, it's all my fault" -- does leave open the possibility that he bitterly regrets something he did. --Deeble, hoping this newbie post is all right From juliemountain at hotmail.com Sun May 21 20:48:30 2006 From: juliemountain at hotmail.com (julie_mntn) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 20:48:30 -0000 Subject: Sorry if it's been done before - but is Mr Weasley all he seems? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152628 Haven't posted in aeons, but still enjoy reading the updates. Felt the need to share something I've been mulling over recently, though. Apologies if you've all been discussing this for years and I'm utterly out of the loop. Just been listening to the audio book of GoF and then decided the movie DVD was essential purchase too. And more and more as I work my way though the series, I'm convinced Arthur Weasley is more than we are led to believe. He always seems to be in the thick of everything, certainly seems to know all the important people - for before Harry's birth and right up to now and seems amazingly influential for a man whose job is portrayed as quite lowly and very poorly paid. I suspect in the final book we are going to discover AW is really a secret big wig in the Ministry and I'm intrigued to find out exactly what his role is in all this. He's not just the bumbling dad of Harry's bezzie mate, I'm sure of that. juliemountain From oppen at mycns.net Sun May 21 22:42:55 2006 From: oppen at mycns.net (ericoppen) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 22:42:55 -0000 Subject: Wizard World prejudices---are they justified? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152629 On this list, we've often bewailed the prejudice that prevents Remus Lupin, a character most of us like, from being able to get a decent job---why, the poor man's reduced to _teaching!_ What's left below that---the Ministry of Magic? *grin* However, it occurs to me to wonder: Just how _justified_ are the WW's prejudices? Granted, Lupin is a gentle, civilized individual who does not deserve mistreatment---how typical of werewolves-in- general is he? If the average werewolf was more like Fenrir Greyback, revelling in his wolfishness and maliciously hurting people, I'd say that the average wizard and witch would be well justified in steering clear of any known werewolf. Hard luck on Lupin, but even Lupin himself acknowledges that when the moon's full, he's terribly dangerous. Were he living near me, I'd like him, but I'd still keep a shotgun loaded with silver swanshot near. Same goes for Hagrid. Hagrid himself is a sweetheart, but does his half-giant background account for his, shall we say, common-sense shortfall? I mean, honestly, what did the great oaf think would happen if people found out about him keeping a bloody _acromantula_ in the Castle? He's kind of like what I posted earlier about Sirius- --he's all but invulnerable, or at least much more resistant to damage, than others, so he tends to forget that those others _are_ more fragile than he is. And, let us not forget what full-blooded giants seem to be like. Had I suffered at giants' hands, I'd be leery of Hagrid, no matter how good-natured he is. And now we come to the prejudice that a lot of people have the most trouble with: the one against Muggle-born magical folk. Hermione, our main on-screen example of a Muggle-born, is obviously setting out to be more wizardly than Merlin...but would this always have been the case? I could easily imagine a Muggle-born from a time when witchcraft was thought to be "of the Devil" causing all sorts of damage in a fit of guilt when his or her childhood training asserted itself---as it often does. A few spectacular incidents like that could confirm mage-raised magical folks' worst suspicions about Muggle-borns, and anything to do with Muggles. If Harry wasn't the poster child for incuriosity (and yes, I do know why---it's that childhood training again, that "Don't ask questions!" thing that Aunt Patooty shrieked into his soul) we could know so much more. From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Sun May 21 23:07:21 2006 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 23:07:21 -0000 Subject: My own take on the Prank Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152630 > Steve: < almost everything snipped> > Final note, again based in speculation, I think it is unfathomable to > think that no one was punished. That seems completely unlikely and > unreasonable even from wizard world perspective. I suspect everyone > including Snape was punished severly, but punished in the framework of > school. In otherwords, a long series of unpleasant detentions and > docking of house points. And, given that no one was hurt, that seems > appropriate. Of course they were punished. As for expulsions, they seem to be much harsher punishment in WW than in RW. If you are expelled, you not only cannot continue your education, but your wand is taken away and broken (remember Hagrid). You are forbidden to do magic and are reduced to a Squib existence for the rest of your life (correct me if I'm wrong). That's why probably this punishment is reserved for extreme cases, like actual murder. The only expulsion that we even know of is Hagrid's, who was accused (falsely) of murder. Harry was not expelled for using Sectumsempra, even though it is potentially murderous curse. If Snape didn't happen to be there, Malfoy could have bled to death. Harry didn't know what this spell did, but he could have hard time proving it. By the way, I always wondered why don't they teach Latin in Hogwarts? Most of the spells are based on Latin, and, if Harry knew it, he could have guessed what the words levicorpus and sectumsempra mean.I know I guessed, and I studied Latin very briefly and 25 years ago. zanooda From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Mon May 22 00:06:38 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 00:06:38 -0000 Subject: Wizard World prejudices---are they justified? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152631 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > > However, it occurs to me to wonder: Just how _justified_ are the > WW's prejudices? Steven1965aaa: It is never possible to justify prejudice by asserting or even proving that some or even many in a group have a certain trait. The fact that some in a group have a trait does not justify "pre judging" the rest of the group and assuming that the rest of the group must share that trait as well. From bawilson at citynet.net Sun May 21 22:50:21 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 18:50:21 -0400 Subject: Durmstrang Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152633 "Strang und Durm" means in German 'storm and strife' and refers to a late 18th/early 19th C. movement in literature, art, and drama (and, to a lesser extent music) the dwelled on strong, towering emotions. Think 'Sorrows of Young Werther', Beethoven's 'Fidelio', etc. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Mon May 22 01:48:58 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 01:48:58 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152634 Alla: > Mine goes something like that - Snape joined > the gang of racists, torturers and murderers. > EVERYBODY in that gang whom we know of is guilty > of making people die at one point of their lifes. > SO, it is not that Snape is Guilty by association houyhnhnm: That *is* guilt by association. Lanval: > Big difference for me. Sirius only had to blurt > out the instructions on how to get past the Whomping > Willow, in a moment of utter frustration [snip] > Snape on the other hand joined the DEs. That requires thought, > intent, and conscious decision-making. houyhnhnm: So, if I understand correctly, you are saying that you feel it is a combination of the degree of intention and the level of animosity that determines how much responsibility someone bears for the evil consequence of an action. It may turn out to be the case that Rowling agrees with that, but I hope not, because I don't. To use a RL example, I don't see any difference in culpability between someone who thoughtlessly gets behind the wheel of a motor vehicle while drunk and kills someone, and one who kills out of rage. I regard Snape as being responsible for the actions of LV and the Death Eaters, including the deaths of the Potters, whether he particapated in any of their murders or not. Simply by joining them, he gave them his sanction. Sirius was not guilty of murder, only because James stepped in. Nor were he, Lupin, James, or Peter guilty of the murder of innocent Hogwarts students, Hogsmeade inhabitants, or Muggles, while out on their monthly escapades, only because they were lucky. Had Lupin gotten away from the others and killed someone, I would consider them all guilty. Lupin was certainly guilty of abandoning his duties as a prefect. They were all guilty of deceiving Dumbledore and putting others at great risk, of escalating the conflict between themselves and Snape, and possibly of pushing him into the arms of the Death Eaters. Snape is a sympathetic character for me, not because he is not responsible for what happened during VWI, but because he alone appears to own the responsibility for his actions. The others never do. *I* am reminded of an old Severn Darden parody of "Oedipus Rex". Darden's Oedipus, unlike Sophocles', refuses to put out his eyes or go into exile when he learns the truth about what he has done. Instead he shouts, "It's not my fault!" and lives happily ever after. I prefer Sophocles. You are right. There is no common ground. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Mon May 22 01:57:04 2006 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (rebecca) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 21:57:04 -0400 Subject: Different Accounts of the Prophecy (Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD) References: Message-ID: <013d01c67d43$066d6030$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 152635 >Deeble said: >Someone has probably brought this up already, but Half-Blood Prince >introduced the possibility that there's something odd about the way >the supposedly loyal Death Eater Snape reported the prophecy >to Voldemort. >This new perspective on the situation seems to suggest that Snape overheard >ALL of the >prophecy. (One could argue that Snape couldn't make out the second half >because the >"uncouth barman" interrupted him, but he certainly wasn't thrown out >halfway through.) >So either Snape, on his own, decided to report only the first half -- or >someone told him >to do so. Someone who gave Harry a somewhat different spin on these events. Rebecca: There are actually several ways that Snape could have overheard only a portion of the prophecy which would explain DD's account and Trelawney's differing accounts quite neatly, and since we're missing a full accounting I thought I'd share. Aberforth could have spotted Snape meander aimlessly up the steps, waited a few, and followed. If Aberforth was concerned with stopping Snape from eavesdropping, all he'd have to be is within line of sight of Snape at the door and performed a nonverbal Muffliato spell (or another spell like it that would work), then confronted Snape and pulled him into the room. . The fact that Trelawney says this part is what made me think of it: 'Yes, there was a commotion outside the door and it flew open...." IMO, if I were Aberforth I'd be more concerned with my brother's privacy first rather than confrontation immediately - and Snape, on another note, could just as easily heard Aberforth coming and tried to come back down the stairs and not have heard the whole thing. He could then have been forced by Aberforth back up and into the room after the prophecy was complete. The possibilities, the possibilities... Rebecca From fourfuries at aol.com Mon May 22 02:10:36 2006 From: fourfuries at aol.com (four4furies) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 02:10:36 -0000 Subject: Wizard World prejudices---are they justified? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152637 Prejudice is a very useful tool for survival in a world where one cannot know everything about everyone, nor predict everything that may happen. I have a prejudice against spiders and snakes, and while they are not all bad, I rarely take the time or the chance to distinguish. The same holds true for people, and while It doesn't make it right, it does make it realistic. All feelings are real. They are not all justified. Unfortunately, we don't always have time to get to know someone. While it is always better to judge people by their actions, sometimes the home taught lessons are all you have to go on. Of course the feelings we have about an individual based on their membership in a group should be carefully examined, but it is often safer to start out cautious and learn to like someone from a another group than it is to trust a stranger after having been warned. From bawilson at citynet.net Sun May 21 22:50:21 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 18:50:21 -0400 Subject: Knockturn Ally Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152638 To the person who said that she didn't get it, read it ALOUD. And think about the fact that Knockturn Alley is where shops selling Dark Magic goods are located. Still don't get it? What is the English adverb meaning 'done in the dark or by night'? BAW From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 02:15:25 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 02:15:25 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152639 > Alla: > > > Mine goes something like that - Snape joined > > the gang of racists, torturers and murderers. > > EVERYBODY in that gang whom we know of is guilty > > of making people die at one point of their lifes. > > > SO, it is not that Snape is Guilty by association > > houyhnhnm: > > That *is* guilt by association. Alla: Um, sure, the way you snipped it, it looks like it. Let me try again. I do NOT blame Snape for the murders other DE committed, I am just saying that it makes no sense that Snape did NOT commit murders, because that is what DE do - they kill and torture and poison people, no? It is canon based speculation of course, but to me that makes sense. I am saying that despite the fact that we do not see Snape committing muders in his DE days, it does not make sense to me that he did not do it. I don't see a REASON for him not to. Or to be more precise I don't see a reason for Voldemort to reliving him of usual DE duties. So, how is it guilt by association, if I am simply speculating that Snape committed murders of his own, which we simply do not know about yet? > houyhnhnm: > Snape is a sympathetic character for me, not because he is not > responsible for what happened during VWI, but because he alone appears > to own the responsibility for his actions. The others never do. Alla: Where does Snape own responsibility for his actions? Instead of going to Azkaban to pay his dues for his DE days, he gets a nice job of Hogwarts professor and Dumbledore's protection. Instead of humble apology to Harry for playing part in his parents' deaths, he well .... treats Harry badly ( that is me understating things a lot) Instead of getting caught for Dumbledore's murder.... Sorry, I am yet to see Snape take ANY kind of responsibility for his actions. JMO, Alla From logistis_20 at yahoo.gr Mon May 22 01:17:30 2006 From: logistis_20 at yahoo.gr (logistis_20) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 01:17:30 -0000 Subject: DD death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152640 DD was the strongest wizard of the century. He made many mistakes but till his death he was trusting Severus. He was the person who killed him. But why? He was the person who said the prophecy to LV. So why he trust him? I can not understand him. I want to believe that DD would like to die like that. I want to believe that DD was so badly heart from the ring that he should die in that way. But not! I can not believe it. Why he should die like that? And why LV he want so badly to kill DD? And the biggest question - who is RAB and what is the middle name of Sirius' brother? Please forgive my English. "logistis_20" From foodiedb at optonline.net Mon May 22 02:22:44 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (David) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 02:22:44 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ Mold Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152641 Randy" wrote Like Grimmauld Place is a grim old place? foodiedb: Being that there are two "m's" and it is pretty mold in there, I took it as Grim mold place. What do you think? From estesrandy at yahoo.com Mon May 22 02:35:57 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 02:35:57 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152642 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "logistis_20" wrote: > > DD was the strongest wizard of the century. He made many mistakes but > till his death he was trusting Severus. He was the person who killed > him. But why? He was the person who said the prophecy to LV. So why he > trust him? > > I can not understand him. > > I want to believe that DD would like to die like that. I want to > believe that DD was so badly heart from the ring that he should die in > that way. > > But not! I can not believe it. > > Why he should die like that? And why LV he want so badly to kill DD? > > And the biggest question - who is RAB and what is the middle name of > Sirius' brother? > > Please forgive my English. > > "logistis_20" > I keep telling myself that Dumbledore is really dead, but then I remember that Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher when Tom Riddle was in school. It just seems so easy for him to have changed into something or someone else, especially since he knows what Draco is doing during the entire school year. Randy From friartuck97 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 02:35:19 2006 From: friartuck97 at yahoo.com (FriarTuck97) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 19:35:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: Socks of Erised/Vanishing Cabinets/Victorian Morality /Nvbl / Drawing Up In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060522023519.42365.qmail@web61023.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152643 Just a quick thought about the socks... When everyone uses the mirror, they see the future (or a possible future)...Ron as Head Boy, Harry with the Stone, DD with the Socks... Could Dumbledore be looking forward to the day when he will retire from the limelight as the one wizard LV ever feared? When he will be free from the constant worry of Voldemort's brand of evil deeds? When he is done serving the needs of the Wizarding World, when he won't be their security blanket anymore? When a new hero will emerge as the new Golden Boy/Chosen One? -FT --------------------------------- Blab-away for as little as 1?/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leslie41 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 02:59:29 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 02:59:29 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152644 > Alla: > Where does Snape own responsibility for his actions? Instead of > going to Azkaban to pay his dues for his DE days, he gets a nice > job of Hogwarts professor and Dumbledore's protection. Leslie41: There is owning up to one's responsibility with words, and then there is owning up to one's responsibility with *actions.* Would *you* like to trade places with Snape, and be a double agent and spy on Voldemort? "Dumbledore's protection" indeed. Dumbledore's the one who's sending him out to spy for the order, often insisting that Snape do things he most obviously would rather not do. Name someone who has a more dangerous job. Just one name will do. Alla: > Instead of humble apology to Harry for playing part in his > parents' deaths, he well .... treats Harry badly (that is me > understating things a lot) Leslie41: Yes, he "treats Harry badly". He's nasty to him. He also saves Harry's life. Where it counts Snape demonstrates more concern for Harry's well being than even Lupin. I'm not saying Snape likes Harry. He doesn't. Which is all the more reason to admire him for consistently attempting to protect him. Humble apologies are nice. But I would rather that someone be cursorily mean to me yet consistently demonstrate responsible and protective *behavior*. Lupin, for example, is a very nice person. He'd be the first one to apologize, even if he wasn't actually in the wrong. But in PoA, he rushes off to the whomping willow, forgetting to take his wolfsbane, and nearly ends up killing Harry (and anyone else who might have gotten in his way). And just how did nasty, unapologetic Snape end up at the whomping willow? Was he spying on Lupin, or looking for goods on Harry? No. Snape, consistently responsible SNAPE, realizes that Lupin has missed his wolfsbane. Not only has he brewed it, he brings it to Lupin personally to see to it he takes it. Snape is not a man of nice words, or humble apologies. And he was a Death Eater. But since that time he has shown himself to be a man of consistently correct *action* where it counts, even towards those he dislikes, whether it's brewing the wolfsbane for Lupin or muttering countercurses to protect Harry. Snape is the epitome of responsibility. He takes responsibility when it really matters. > Instead of getting caught for Dumbledore's murder.... Leslie41: Ah, but that's a matter that's been hashed over many times, and it's by no means clear that Snape is the bad guy. Only Book VII will tell. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Mon May 22 02:52:50 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 02:52:50 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152645 logistis_20 wrote: > > Why he should die like that? And why LV he want so badly to kill DD? > Najwa now: I honestly believe he's dead, but not because snape outsmarted him or anything, and not because snape is stronger than him. My belief is that Dumbledore knew of the unbreakable vow, and knew what was going on with draco, and right at that moment in time, it was necessary for him to die, so he begged snape to do it. Like i've said before, it's not like we'll never hear from him again, there are always portraits and possibly those chocolate frog cards :). As for why LV wanted him dead, it's because LV knows that DD is the reason that everything stays together and he keeps getting beaten. LV is afraid of DD, and knows with him around it will be next to impossible to get Harry. Najwa From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 03:20:35 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 03:20:35 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152646 > > Alla: > > Where does Snape own responsibility for his actions? Instead of > > going to Azkaban to pay his dues for his DE days, he gets a nice > > job of Hogwarts professor and Dumbledore's protection. > > Leslie41: > There is owning up to one's responsibility with words, and then > there is owning up to one's responsibility with *actions.* > > Would *you* like to trade places with Snape, and be a double agent > and spy on Voldemort? "Dumbledore's protection" indeed. > Dumbledore's the one who's sending him out to spy for the order, > often insisting that Snape do things he most obviously would rather > not do. Name someone who has a more dangerous job. Just one name > will do. Alla: Yes, with actions. All former DE went to Azkaban, Snape did not. He instead got paying job abd yes, DD protection. For twelve years before Voldemort returned he did not do any dangerous tasks and no, I do not believe that DD forced Snape to do anything he did not want to do in GoF. To me if you are ready, if you are prepared means exactly that. As to whether I would like to trade places with Snape, hmmmm, who knows, but I would like to believe that if I owed SO much to society as IMO Snape does, I would felt that I should pay it in any way I could. Alla: > > Instead of getting caught for Dumbledore's murder.... > > Leslie41: > Ah, but that's a matter that's been hashed over many times, and it's > by no means clear that Snape is the bad guy. Only Book VII will > tell. Alla: Sure. I was just showing how in my opinion Snape did not take responsbility for that, since I don't think of this as a good , noble deed, that is all. From puduhepa98 at aol.com Mon May 22 03:38:11 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 23:38:11 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) Message-ID: <393.336e82d.31a28c23@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152647 SSSusan wrote: > You know, I've recently been bemoaning the fact, offlist to a couple > of folks, that there seems to be a tendency to focus a LOT on real > life morality when we discuss the Potterverse these days. That's > not always a bad thing... it's certainly natural to draw parallels > to the life we lead... but sometimes it almost seems like we just > can't have FUN with the books and characters, can't JOSH about > things, without a RL "standard" or "judgment" being handed down. Nikkalmati One of my favorite scenes is Harry's first Potions class. "What is the difference, Potter, between monkshood and wolfsbane?" At this, Hermione stood up, her hand stretching toward the dungeon ceiling. "I don't know," said Harry quietly. "I think Hermione does, though, why don't you try her?" . . . . . "And a point will be taken from Gryffindor House for your cheek, Potter." SS/PS Scholastic paperback ed. p. 158. I think it was the first time I laughed out loud (but not the last). Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Mon May 22 04:47:35 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 04:47:35 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152648 Alla: > > I do NOT blame Snape for the murders other DE committed, I am just > saying that it makes no sense that Snape did NOT commit murders, > because that is what DE do - they kill and torture and poison > people, no? > > It is canon based speculation of course, but to me that makes sense. > > I am saying that despite the fact that we do not see Snape > committing muders in his DE days, it does not make sense to me that > he did not do it. > > I don't see a REASON for him not to. Or to be more precise I don't > see a reason for Voldemort to reliving him of usual DE duties. > > So, how is it guilt by association, if I am simply speculating that > Snape committed murders of his own, which we simply do not know > about yet? Julie: It wouldn't be guilt by association if Snape committed murders, but I don't agree that he necessarily had to commit murders to be a DE. True, most of the DEs we've met spend their time torturing and killing, but we don't know that all of them do. In any "criminal" organization (for want of a better term) the members perform a variety of tasks depending on each member's strength. In the mafia the guy who's a financial wizard (pun unintentional) might handle the books, for instance. He probably knows who has killed or been killed, even though he'd have no reason to take part in the murders because he has other skills valuable to the boss of the organization. Similarly, there's no reason we have to assume Snape directly killed anyone during his time as a DE. Nor that he directly tortured anyone, guarded Voldemort's "prisoners", etc. He's a highly gifted Potions Master (this is very much supported by canon) and it makes perfect sense that Voldemort would use him in this capacity, to make life- extending elixirs, truth serums to use on prisoners, or whatever. Add the additional canon of Snape's penchant for spying long before he did so for Dumbledore--the overheard prophecy incident and Snape's original application to Hogwarts at Voldemort's request--and we have TWO areas where Snape's intellect and skills are of much greater value to Voldemort than his wizardly brawn, which is something any dozen dunderhead DEs can easily provide. BTW, the legal term for guilt by association in the case of murder is "accessory to murder," and it often carries the same sentence in a court of law as that of the actual murderer. If Snape was aware of the murders being committed by other DEs and did nothing to stop it (perhaps even aided their activities with his potions or in some other manner) then legally he is as guilty as any of them. Though perhaps his soul wouldn't be torn, and how that could make a difference in his chances for redemption I don't know. > > > houyhnhnm: > > > Snape is a sympathetic character for me, not because he is not > > responsible for what happened during VWI, but because he alone > appears > > to own the responsibility for his actions. The others never do. > > Alla: > > Where does Snape own responsibility for his actions? Instead of > going to Azkaban to pay his dues for his DE days, he gets a nice job > of Hogwarts professor and Dumbledore's protection. > > Instead of humble apology to Harry for playing part in his parents' > deaths, he well .... treats Harry badly ( that is me understating > things a lot) Julie: If Snape is DDM, he switched sides and quite likely promised to do whatever Dumbledore asked of him. True, he had twelve or so years of teaching before he was required to take direct action as a double spy in Voldemort's camp, but that doesn't mean he had any more real freedom than the DEs in Azkaban (though he likely remained much healthier, mentally and physically). Whether by magic or simply by his word he bound himself to Dumbledore, remained at Hogwarts teaching when for all we know he would have preferred to do *anything* besides that, waiting for the inevitable (assuming he believed along with Dumbledore that Voldemort would definitely be back). Really, while Hogwarts may have been more comfortable than Azkaban, it was definitely no free ride from responsibility. (If he was looking to deny responsibility he could have simply disappeared once Voldemort was turned into Vapormort, as he had nothing to fear from the Dark Lord at that point, and he could always worry later should his Dark Mark reappear. And perhaps during those twelve years he could have found a way to get rid of the mark!) Julie From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 22 06:28:21 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 06:28:21 -0000 Subject: Durmstrang In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152649 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Alan Wilson" wrote: > > "Strang und Durm" means in German 'storm and strife' and refers to a late > 18th/early 19th C. movement in literature, art, and drama (and, to a lesser > extent music) the dwelled on strong, towering emotions. Think 'Sorrows of Young > Werther', Beethoven's 'Fidelio', etc. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Geoff: If you will permit me to correct your message, the German is "Sturm und Drang". As I explained in message 152553, Jo Rowling has spoonerised this to get Durmstrang. From enlil65 at gmail.com Mon May 22 06:26:40 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 01:26:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? In-Reply-To: <007c01c67c4d$6593d130$9998400c@Spot> References: <20060520182718.97366.qmail@web37202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <007c01c67c4d$6593d130$9998400c@Spot> Message-ID: <1789c2360605212326p43531a53j6e62b85cf3570b53@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152650 On 5/20/06, Magpie wrote: > Magpie: > Oh, I don't think there is a connection to the school. It just sounds > funny, is my guess, for the hog connection, which is also connected to > Hogsmeade. The area may have originally been associated with pigs. As an > aside, Swineherds were often associated with madness and therefore sort of > Shamanistic visions. Merlin in some legends was mad for a time, and I think > also tended pigs. Then of course there's the winged boars outside the > school suggesting "when pigs fly." I don't remember winged boars outside; where is this written? I'm interested in all the pig allusions because one of my favorite anagrams of my name is "We Kingly Pigs". It strikes me as something Dumbledore might be amused at. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From adzuroth at hotmail.com Mon May 22 04:11:51 2006 From: adzuroth at hotmail.com (Adzuroth) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 04:11:51 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152652 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > logistis_20 wrote: > > > > Why he should die like that? And why LV he want so badly to kill DD? > > > > > Najwa now: > I honestly believe he's dead, but not because snape outsmarted him or > anything, and not because snape is stronger than him. My belief is > that Dumbledore knew of the unbreakable vow, and knew what was going > on with draco, and right at that moment in time, it was necessary for > him to die, so he begged snape to do it. > Am I the only one who thinks there's something a wee bit wrong with the belief that Dumbledore suddenly got tired of living and decided to die on his knees at the hands of Snape, begging for his life? I always thought DD had a little more pride than that, and would have prefered to look Snape square in the eye and say "just do what you've gotta do". DD more than likely wanted the rest of the wizarding world to believe he was dead so Voldy and the DE's would have a huge false sense of security. They would then become much bolder than ever before, which would lead them to make mistakes that Harry could capitalize on. Besides, if DD really believed he was going to die he could at any time have summoned the house elves to defend him (and no, you don't need a wand for that). There's much more to DD's so-called death scene than meets the eye. Has there ever been another instance where pumping a ton of emotions into an unforgivable curse resulted in an additional effect on top of its intended result? As far as I know the answer is no. If you hit someone with the killing curse, they simply fell over dead as opposed to getting knocked backwards over a battlement. P.S.- anyone have an idea as to why JKR called the undead inferi instead of using the more popular nomenclature of zombies? Adzuroth From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 22 10:28:10 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 10:28:10 -0000 Subject: Winged boars (was Re:Wordplay) In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605212326p43531a53j6e62b85cf3570b53@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152653 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy Wilkins" wrote: > > On 5/20/06, Magpie wrote: > > > Magpie: > > Oh, I don't think there is a connection to the school. It just sounds > > funny, is my guess, for the hog connection, which is also connected to > > Hogsmeade. The area may have originally been associated with pigs. As an > > aside, Swineherds were often associated with madness and therefore sort of > > Shamanistic visions. Merlin in some legends was mad for a time, and I think > > also tended pigs. Then of course there's the winged boars outside the > > school suggesting "when pigs fly." Peggy Wilkins: > I don't remember winged boars outside; where is this written? > > I'm interested in all the pig allusions because one of my favorite > anagrams of my name is "We Kingly Pigs". It strikes me as something > Dumbledore might be amused at. Geoff: The references which come to mind include the following: 'As the carriage trundled towards a pair of magnificent wrought-iron gates, flanked with stone columns topped with winged boars, Harry saw two more towering, hooded Dementors, standing guard on either side.' (POA "The Dementor" p.68 UK edition) 'Through the gates, flanked with statues of winged boars, and up the sweeping drive the carriages trundled, swaying dangerously in what was fast becoming a gale. (GOF "The Triwizard Tournament" p.152 UK edition) 'Rattling and swaying, the carriages moved in convoy up the road. When they passed between the tall stone pillars topped with winged boars on either side of the gates to the school grounds, Harry leaned forwards to try to see whether there were any lights on in Hagrid's cabin by the Forbidden Forest but the grounds were in complete darkness.' (OOTP "The Sorting Hat's New Song" p.181 UK edition) 'Having always travelled there by carriage, Harry hed never before appreciated just how far Hogwarts was from Hogsmeade Station. With great relief he finally saw the tall pillars on either side of the gates, each topped with a winged boar.' (HBP "Snape Victorious" p.151 UK edition) I think we have winged boars outside... :-) It's interesting that JKR always mentions them when Harry makes a 'conventional' arrival at the school. In PS, he arrives by boat and in COS by flying car. Is she trying to tell us something? From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 06:39:50 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 06:39:50 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152654 > Leslie41: > Well, as I believe there is ample evidence that Snape is DDM, I > would say that what Snape is doing as a double agent is arguably the > most dangerous and demanding job possible. Not to mention his > repeated healing of DD, saving of Harry, etc. etc. etc. How is, > then, praise of him "unfair?" Black doesn't do nearly as much for > the Order, for DD, or for Harry for that matter. Lanval: As for 'unfair praise': I mean certain arguments along the way of "Snape is only nasty to Harry because he has to make him strong; deep down he really loves him..." My memory is unfortunatly not as good as Dumbledore's, but right now I remember Snape healing DD once in HBP, after the destruction of the ring horcrux. Was there another scene? As I said, I don't have the books around... The second scene I recall is the Astronomy Tower. DD indeed 'needed' Snape, but it would take some pretty dark humor to call what Snape did 'healing'. His 'repeated saving' of Harry? Again, I remember one occasion. In PS/SS. Snape was muttering a counter-curse. On what other occasions does Snape save Harry's life? "etc. etc. etc" Can you please explain? As to Sirius, well... Nah. He only returned from that tropical place, where he'd been enjoying the first bit of real freedom in thirteen years, to be near Harry, and eat rats in a cave (though in fairness it should be added that rats ARE edible). Then he let the Order use his house, and agreed to stay locked up in that nasty, creepy dwelling full of bad memories, living with depression... because he felt that he might be of more use to his godson there, than in some tropical vacation spot, or Antarctica, or the Gobi desert. Next Harry got himself in trouble, and Sirius rushed off to save him. Sirius died in the fight. You're right. No big deal. > Leslie41: > Well, it depends on what you want to condemn them of. Certainly > that's not the incident in which we can accuse Black of attempting > to get Snape eaten by a werewolf. > > But boy, those boys are nasty. Mean and malicious and nasty, taking > great pains to hunt down and publicly humiliate a fellow student > who, at that point, is just keeping to himself. > Lanval: Yes and no. There's not much 'hunting down' involved, Snape sits down nearby. But overall, agreed. >Leslie41: > I would condemn James and Sirius for being arrogant, thieving, self- > important, Lanval: See, that's where you lose me. Arrogant, yes. Self-important, definitely. But 'thieving'? Canon, please? >Leslie41 >malicious a-holes, whose great joy in life is taken in > socially eviscerating the less popular and less attractive just > because they CAN. Lanval: And here your argument leaves Canonland forever, and floats off into the vast space of Creative Speculation. Canon, please, for Sirius and James' foremost joy in life being the social destruction of all the less popular and attractive? >Leslie41: > Did they stay that way? Probably not. Lily, who I have great > respect for just on the basis of that scene, came around to falling > in love with James, and I would think that it must have been he who > changed, not her, because I find it hard to believe she would have > married him if he didn't. Sirius, of course, is broken by Azkaban, > and he's lost his looks, but he's still got a strong streak of > arrogance and meanness in him. Lanval: Can you point me to where in canon Sirius, post-POA, displays strong meanness toward anyone but Snape (and, on one occasion to Harry)? > Lanval: > > > Big difference for me. Sirius only had to blurt > > out the instructions on how to get past the Whomping > > Willow, in a moment of utter frustration > [snip] > > Snape on the other hand joined the DEs. That requires thought, > > intent, and conscious decision-making. > > houyhnhnm: > > So, if I understand correctly, you are saying that you feel it is a > combination of the degree of intention and the level of animosity that > determines how much responsibility someone bears for the evil > consequence of an action. Lanval: If you're asking, do I consider intent, malice aforethought, scheming, etc., to be important when assessing a deed that results/may have resulted in dire consequences? Er, yes. So does the court system where I live. They make some distinction between first and second degree murder, manslaughter, criminal negligence, accident, and so on. > houyhnhnm: > It may turn out to be the case that Rowling agrees with that, but I > hope not, because I don't. To use a RL example, I don't see any > difference in culpability between someone who thoughtlessly gets > behind the wheel of a motor vehicle while drunk and kills someone, and > one who kills out of rage. > Lanval: That's bit of a flawed example. The victim of a drunk driver doesn't have much of a choice. Snape HAD a choice. He could have stayed in his bed where he belonged. houyhnhnm: > I regard Snape as being responsible for the actions of LV and the > Death Eaters, including the deaths of the Potters, whether he > particapated in any of their murders or not. Simply by joining them, > he gave them his sanction. > Lanval: Wow, you're harsher on him than I am. If we ever find out that Snape did not, in fact, participate personally in any torture or killing, then I will hold him less culpable than those who did, or those who ordered it. houyhnhnm: > Sirius was not guilty of murder, only because James stepped in. Lanval: Sirius was not guilty of 'murder', period. James or no James. houyhnhnm: Nor > were he, Lupin, James, or Peter guilty of the murder of innocent > Hogwarts students, Hogsmeade inhabitants, or Muggles, while out on > their monthly escapades, only because they were lucky. Had Lupin > gotten away from the others and killed someone, I would consider them > all guilty. Lanval: Of murder? All of them? If something had happened to Harry and Draco in PS/SS on the night of their detention in the forest... would Hagrid be guilty of murder? It was, after all, a pretty stupid place to take kids for detention. Are Crabbe and Goyle guilty of murder for helping Draco in HPB? Is Draco guilty of murdering DD, since his actions ultimately, and according to plan, led to the events on the tower? houyhnhnm: Lupin was certainly guilty of abandoning his duties as a > prefect. They were all guilty of deceiving Dumbledore and putting > others at great risk, of escalating the conflict between themselves > and Snape, and possibly of pushing him into the arms of the Death Eaters. > Lanval: No one pushed Snape. He became a DE because he WANTED to become a DE. He, and he alone, was ultimately responsible for that decision. Neville is bullied constantly by Snape and his grandmother, and has yet to show DE tendencies. houyhnhnm: > Snape is a sympathetic character for me, not because he is not > responsible for what happened during VWI, but because he alone appears > to own the responsibility for his actions. The others never do. > Lanval: Sirius accepts responsibility for James' and Lily's death, even though he did not betray them. Dumbledore freely accepts blame for several things. Lupin agrees that he's too dangerous and unreliable to teach at Hogwarts. That's just a few examples. Snape? We hear from DD that he felt remorse, and switched sides. That's it. He tells Bellatrix that he "spun DD a tale of deepest remorse." What to believe? > > Alla: > > Where does Snape own responsibility for his actions? Instead of > > going to Azkaban to pay his dues for his DE days, he gets a nice > > job of Hogwarts professor and Dumbledore's protection. > > Leslie41: > There is owning up to one's responsibility with words, and then > there is owning up to one's responsibility with *actions.* > > Would *you* like to trade places with Snape, and be a double agent > and spy on Voldemort? "Dumbledore's protection" indeed. > Dumbledore's the one who's sending him out to spy for the order, > often insisting that Snape do things he most obviously would rather > not do. Name someone who has a more dangerous job. Just one name > will do. >\ Lanval: Remus Lupin? Emmeline Vance? Leslie41: > And just how did nasty, unapologetic Snape end up at the whomping > willow? Was he spying on Lupin, or looking for goods on Harry? No. > Snape, consistently responsible SNAPE, realizes that Lupin has > missed his wolfsbane. Not only has he brewed it, he brings it to > Lupin personally to see to it he takes it. > Lanval: Um, from what I remember, Snape brings Lupin the potion at an earlier time as well, and never loses a word about Lupin 'having forgotten to take it". Seems part of the arrangement, that Snape will deliver the potion when it's ready. (Does anyone truly believe that Snape brews this potion out of the goodness of his heart? Or could it be that DD asked/ordered him to do so?) I also distinctly recall Snape gloating about how LUCKY he was to find Lupin gone -- and the map on the table. Lucky, because Snape understood what it meant. Lucky because it meant "two more for Azkaban tonight", maybe even for for a little Kiss. Nope, Snape does not end up in the Shrieking Shack because he worries about dear Remus taking his potion. Nor is he there to protect Harry. His purpose is to catch Black and Lupin. > > Leslie41: > Ah, but that's a matter that's been hashed over many times, and it's > by no means clear that Snape is the bad guy. Only Book VII will > tell. Lanval: And if he turns out to be DDM, that's fine with me. I'm still on the fence. But I'll never like the guy. From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Mon May 22 11:46:51 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:46:51 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060522114651.18485.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152655 --- lanval1015 wrote: > > Can you point me to where in canon Sirius, post-POA, > displays strong > meanness toward anyone but Snape (and, on one > occasion to Harry)? So if someone is only mean to two people, it does not make him mean, right? Did I get your argument correctly? Brilliant, because that should close all the "Snape the mean teacher" arguments forever. He is only mean to Harry and Neville, ergo, he is not mean. ;-)))) > Lanval: > (Does anyone truly believe that Snape brews this > potion out of the > goodness of his heart? Or could it be that DD > asked/ordered him to > do so?) Again we have this distinction of words vs. deeds. It does not matter that he didn't brew it out of the goodness of his heart. He spent his time brewing this difficult potion every four weeks, and delivered it to Lupin personally (despite all the passive-agressive shit Lupin was dishing out, but that's another thread), and that's all that counts with me. > > Nope, Snape does not end up in the Shrieking Shack > because he > worries about dear Remus taking his potion. Nor is > he there to > protect Harry. His purpose is to catch Black and > Lupin. And what is wrong with that? Black is a convicted criminal on the run, and Snape suspects Lupin of aiding him (quite justified in his suspicions too; Lupin was in fact helping Black, by witholding information). Irene Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 11:57:48 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 11:57:48 -0000 Subject: Snape brewing Wolfsbane. WAS:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: <20060522114651.18485.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152656 > > Lanval: > > (Does anyone truly believe that Snape brews this > > potion out of the > > goodness of his heart? Or could it be that DD > > asked/ordered him to > > do so?) Irene: > Again we have this distinction of words vs. deeds. It > does not matter that he didn't brew it out of the > goodness of his heart. He spent his time brewing this > difficult potion every four weeks, and delivered it to > Lupin personally (despite all the passive-agressive > shit Lupin was dishing out, but that's another > thread), and that's all that counts with me. Alla: That's ALL that counts? Certainly not to me, because what if dear Snape was brewing this potion under direct orders from Dumbledore, and the penalty would be, oh, I don't know, let's say - do it or lose your job. In this little speculation I see absolutely nothing that Remus should be grateful to Snape for, but only to Dumbledore. Because in this situation Snape loses A LOT if he refuses to brew this potion, even if he much prefer not to do so. JMO, Alla. From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon May 22 12:03:03 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:03:03 -0000 Subject: My own take on the Prank In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152657 > > bboyminn: > > I'm inclined to agree, too many people are injecting their own > negative preceptions into this incident. First and foremost, we don't > know exactly what happened and we don't know for a fact that no one > was punished... all Sirius did was pass some information on to > Snape. Snape, himself, was in complete control of what he did with > that information. Finwitch: Great post. And so like Snape to blame Sirius for 'attempt of murder' over what was really his own foolishness. I certainly like the idea of Sirius *warning* Snape about going there! If his exact words were to the effect of "too dangerous for you" - you bet 16-year-old Severus Snape would think "What? I know more curses than Black and Potter put together, and it would be too risky for *me?!?!*" And go there. Oh, and as said, we don't know no one was punished, but: 1) Potter *saved* SS' life, and I doubt there was any evidence he ever broke the rule about going there otherwise. (DD never did find out their Animagi business until the adult Sirius told him). I very much doubt that either DD or MM would punish Potter for saving a student... more likely he was rewarded (Head Boy acc. Hagrid) 2)If indeed Sirius said he was only *warning* Snape about going there, what precisely punishable is there about it? There is no Hogwarts rule about warning students against breaking rules, is there? Even that could be rewarded (by 10 points or something)! 3)Snape got a good scare, but *he* didn't have any good reason behind his actions, so -- DD might have considered the scare (and Snape's embarrasment for owing lifedebt to James Potter) as punishment enough, but I don't know how Slughorn saw matters here. (Snape ignoring Sirius' warning, breaking rules etc. for nothing) --- The warning certainly is not like Malfoy issuing a challenge for a duel and then not show up&report to teacher, is it? Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon May 22 12:20:26 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:20:26 -0000 Subject: Winged boars (was Re:Wordplay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152658 > > I think we have winged boars outside... > :-) > > It's interesting that JKR always mentions them when Harry makes > a 'conventional' arrival at the school. In PS, he arrives by boat > and in COS by flying car. Finwitch: They have wings because this is Magical world, out of the '-- and maybe pigs would fly' saying describing something hard to believe/unlikely to happen. (like magic in real world?;) ) In addition, it's HOGwarts! What else would be guarding it? I guess the boars have warts, too! As to why boars instead of regular pigs - because boars are WILD, dangerous and not so domesticated -- and it's the boar that's the *heraldic* animal! Finwitch From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Mon May 22 12:53:29 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:53:29 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape brewing Wolfsbane. WAS:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060522125329.51971.qmail@web86211.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152659 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > Alla: > > That's ALL that counts? Certainly not to me, because > what if dear > Snape was brewing this potion under direct orders > from Dumbledore, > and the penalty would be, oh, I don't know, let's > say - do it or > lose your job. In this little speculation I see > absolutely nothing > that Remus should be grateful to Snape for, but only > to Dumbledore. > I could never believe in blackmailing Dumbledore, but even assuming that's possible... Do doctors like all of the patients they treat? Do they do it out of goodness of their hearts? No, they are doing it under direct orders of hospital manager, under the threat of losing their income. :-) Evil, evil people. I'll never be grateful to any one of them again, only to the people who order them around. I see it as a point in Snape's favour - that he is capable of doing what's necessary for the person that he clearly dislikes. Lily had it in her - she was doing her Prefect duty even though she didn't care for Snape at all. (And dear Remus didn't, but he is so nice that we'll forgive him). I understand that lots of people don't see this capability to separate feelings and actions as a positive quality, they see it as duplicity. Usually these people admire straighforward, honest, Gryffindor "what I think is what I say and do" attitude. The one that got Sirius so far with Kreacher. Irene Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From chrusokomos at gmail.com Mon May 22 13:08:38 2006 From: chrusokomos at gmail.com (chrusotoxos) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:08:38 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152660 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Adzuroth" wrote: > Am I the only one who thinks there's something a wee bit wrong with the > belief that Dumbledore suddenly got tired of living and decided to die > on his knees at the hands of Snape, begging for his life? > If you hit someone with the killing curse, they simply fell over > dead as opposed to getting knocked backwards over a battlement. > > P.S.- anyone have an idea as to why JKR called the undead inferi > instead of using the more popular nomenclature of zombies? > > Adzuroth > Chrus now I don't think that DD 'suddenly got tired of living'. I think that he knew about the whole Draco debacle, and chose this way to solve it because he was already dying. He was old, and 'his last duel with the Dark Lord has wounded him greatly' (HPB ch.1). He was not afraid of dying, and he probably will still talk to Harry through his portrait. As for the battlement, I think Snape hated him in that moment, because he was forcing him to kill him and he didn't want to ('he said that mybe he was taking too much for granted, and that he didn't want to do it anymore', as Hagrid overhears). The curse pushes you back, as for Sirius in OotP, and thus DD fell down. Also, JKR needed him to fall down for aesthetic plot beauty - nobody would have found him for hours, if DD were dead on the top of a tower vs beautiful scene of mourning crowd overshadowed by weeping Hagrid. Inferius is a latin word for 'subterrenean'. JKR always tries to use old words for spells and stuff, such as Sanskrit Avada Kedavra. Also, zombies aren't the same thing: they're undead for various reasons and normally kill at random, you cannot raise them and command them. From greatraven at hotmail.com Mon May 22 13:09:09 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:09:09 -0000 Subject: Sorry if it's been done before - but is Mr Weasley all he seems? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152661 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "julie_mntn" wrote: > > Haven't posted in aeons, but still enjoy reading the updates. Felt > the need to share something I've been mulling over recently, > though. Apologies if you've all been discussing this for years and I'm > utterly out of the loop. > > Just been listening to the audio book of GoF and then decided > the movie DVD was essential purchase too. And more and > more as I work my way though the series, I'm convinced Arthur > Weasley is more than we are led to believe. > > He always seems to be in the thick of everything, certainly > seems to know all the important people - for before Harry's birth > and right up to now and seems amazingly influential for a man > whose job is portrayed as quite lowly and very poorly paid. > > I suspect in the final book we are going to discover AW is really a > secret big wig in the Ministry and I'm intrigued to find out exactly > what his role is in all this. He's not just the bumbling dad of > Harry's bezzie mate, I'm sure of that. > > juliemountain Sue here: I don't think there's anything secret about Arthur. We're told, flat out, that he wasn't promoted because he had a lot of sympathy for/enthusiasm about Muggles - a no-no in Fudge's Ministry. He has only one staff member, a warlock called Perkins and a broom- closet-sized office. If he was a secret bigwig, Molly would surely know about it, and they wouldn't be having such a hard time providing the kids with decent clothes, schoolbooks, etc., would they? However, he does seem to have large responsibilities and he actually framed some laws, if I recall, because Molly accused him of putting in a loophole that let him mess around with that car, as long as he wasn't intending to use it. Not the sort of thing we got to do when I was working as a Clerk Class 1 in the Australian Public Service! ;-) > From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon May 22 13:20:56 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:20:56 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152662 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 16: A Very Frosty Christmas When we pick up again, it is Christmas break, and Harry is at the Burrow with the Weasleys. Ron asks, apparently for the umpteenth time, whether Snape was *definitely* offering to help Draco in that classroom. Apparently annoyed by the umpteenth asking, Harry threatens "to stick this sprout--." Harry does, however, reiterate that Snape was indeed offering to help Draco. While they've gone over this before, apparently this is the first time Harry thinks to mention that Snape had taken "an Unbreakable Oath or something." This certainly gets a rise out of Ron, who both knows what an Unbreakable Vow is and has serious doubts that Snape would have taken one. Ron explains that if one breaks a UV, one dies. He also explains that Fred & George tried to get Ron to make one when he was about 5, until his dad stopped them. "Only time I've ever seen Dad as angry as Mum," says Ron. At this point the twins enter the kitchen and so the conversation turns, of course, to teasing. First they give Ron a hard time because he can't yet use magic to peel sprouts. (Neither do they offer to assist, natch.) Then they give Ron what-for over what they've heard from Ginny about him & Lavender Brown. Fred & George do not want to congratulate Ron on achieving A Relationship; they, rather, elect to ask him how the heck he has managed one at all ? did the girl suffer brain damage or something? Mrs. Weasley comes in and we learn Remus Lupin is coming for Christmas. Fred inquires about Percy, and Molly says she expects he's too busy to come. "Or he's the world's biggest prat," says Fred, after Molly leaves. After the twins leave, the conversation returns to the overheard Snape-Draco conversation. Ron asks Harry if he's going to report it to DD. Yes, he says, and not only to DD, but "to anyone who can put a stop to it." Ron ? hmmmm, is Ron actually being subtle here? ? remarks that it's a pity Harry didn't hear exactly what Draco is up to. He also anticipates that his dad & DD will say Snape was *really* just out for information from Draco. Ron assures Harry that he believes him but that he's simply pointing out that "they" are all convinced Snape's in the Order. Harry knows Ron is right and even suspects Hermione will protest the same thing. Christmas Eve arrives and we're treated to a description of the Weasleys' festive living room. Seems Ginny's decorated "lavishly," and the Christmas tree sports a real live gnome, one who had pissed off Fred by biting him and had, in return, been stupefied, painted gold, and stuffed into a costume of tutu and angel wings. The family and guests are listening to Celestina Warbeck, Mrs. Weasley's favorite singer, on the wireless. Fleur begins talking so loudly that Molly scowls and keeps turning up the volume. While Remus stares into the fire, Celestina sings: Oh, come and stir my cauldron, And if you do it right, I'll boil you up some hot strong love To keep you warm tonight. [My, oh my. Good thing this is Harry Potter for *Grownups*! ;-)] As Celestina's warbling continues, Arthur mentions that the Ministry is getting nowhere despite much effort and is now resorting to some dubious arrests in order to keep up the appearance of making progress. Harry decides to tell Mr. Weasley about the Draco-Snape conversation. He becomes aware that Lupin is listening as well. Arthur, of course, says exactly what Ron figured he would: perhaps Snape was simply pretending, to fish for information from Draco. "But how do we know?" asks Harry. "It isn't our business to know," interjects Lupin. "It's Dumbledore's business. Dumbledore trusts Severus, and that ought to be enough for all of us." Harry protests that DD could be wrong. Lupin counters that "it comes down to whether or not you trust Dumbledore's judgment. I do; therefore, I trust Severus." Harry asks Lupin if he honestly likes Snape. Lupin says he neither likes nor dislikes Snape -- truly. There *is* bitterness in their past, but there has also been assistance, as with the Wolfsbane Potion. Harry continues to protest, prompting Lupin to say, "You are determined to hate him, Harry." Lupin *understands* this tendency in Harry, and even tells him to tell the whole story to DD if he likes, but not to expect DD to be surprised by any of it. Lupin tells Harry what he's been doing, which is lying low amongst the werewolves, as a spy. When Harry asks why werewolves tend to like Voldemort, Lupin says it's because they believe they'll have a better life under him. He tells Harry about vicious Fenrir Greyback, a werewolf who "specializes" in biting children, and the werewolf who bit Lupin as a child. With Greyback, this is intentional. Lupin mentions that it's hard to make headway against Greyback's push for revenge against "normal people," and Harry says, "But you are normal! You've just got a-- a problem--." This causes Lupin to burst out laughing. He recalls that James used to call it his "furry little problem." Hearing his father's name prompts Harry to ask Lupin if he's ever heard of someone called the "Half-Blood Prince." "There are no Wizarding princes," Lupin says. Harry explains about the textbook, with its detailed notes, its hand-written spells invented by the owner, including Levicorpus. Lupin says "reminiscently" that that spell had been quite popular in his 5th year. After Harry mentions that he saw James use Levicorpus on Snape in the Pensieve, Lupin reiterates that James was not the only person to have used it. He tells Harry it's also possible the note-writer didn't actually invent Levicorpus and then, catching on to what Harry was thinking, adds, "I promise you, [James] never asked us to call him `Prince.'" Upon direct questioning, he also says it was definitely not himself or Sirius either. Lupin suggests checking how old the textbook is. Harry does and finds it's 50 years old, which disappoints him. On Christmas morning Harry awakens to the sound of Ron saying, "She's got to be joking...." Lav-Lav has given him a gold necklace bearing the words "My Sweetheart." Ron emphatically does not want Fred & George to see it. He admits to Harry that it's mostly just snogging and then asks if Hermione is really going out with McLaggen. Harry's gifts include a Mrs. Weasley sweater, which everyone else, except Fleur, has also received. Harry's has a Golden Snitch on the front. He also receives goodies from Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes and, surprisingly, a packet from Kreacher. Before opening this, Harry wonders aloud whether he should have given Kreacher a gift, whether it's typical for owners to give their house-elves Christmas presents. Ron says Hermione would but Harry should wait and see what Kreacher has sent "before feeling guilty." Smart Ron. Harry opens the parcel to find Kreacher has sent him maggots! (Ginny, btw, notices a maggot in Harry's hair at breakfast and reaches to pick it out, eliciting goose bumps from Harry "having nothing to do with the maggot.") Mrs. Weasley pointedly mentions that she'd invited Tonks, but she wouldn't come, and then asks whether Lupin has spoken with her lately. He says no but that he thinks she has a family to go to. Molly says she believes Tonks planned to be alone at Christmas and shoots Lupin an annoyed look, "as though it was all his fault she was getting Fleur for a daughter-in-law instead of Tonks." Ever so briefly, the subject turns to Patronuses. Harry asks Lupin about Tonks's changed Patronus, and why that could happen. Lupin's response is that a great shock or emotional upheaval can cause it. Before Harry can ask anything else, Mrs. Weasley rises from her seat and exclaims, "Arthur ? it's Percy!" (Speaking of great shocks and emotional unheaval.) Indeed, Percy has come to the Burrow, accompanied by Rufus Scrimgeour. The reunion is stiff and awkward. Mrs. Weasley hugs him, but Percy remains uncomfortable-looking. Scrimgeour claims that they've only stopped by because they were nearby and Percy "wanted to see you all so badly." This elicits tears and a kiss from Molly. Scrimgeour then asks whether "that young man" [Harry] might accompany him on a walk in the garden, but the pretense is apparently transparent to all. Still, Harry agrees. Once outside, Scrimgeour confesses he's wanted to meet and speak to Harry for a long time, but as DD has been quite protective, it's not been possible. No response from Harry. "The rumors that have flown around! ...whispers of a prophecy... of you being the `Chosen One'...." No response from Harry. Scrimgeour asks what DD has told Harry about all this. Harry does finally answer, but he simply says, "Sorry, but that's between us." Scrimgeour makes a show of understanding, but he's not finished yet. He mentions that it doesn't *really* matter if Harry's the Chosen One ? to the Wizarding World, anyway ? as it's "all perception... it's what people believe that's important." Harry realizes where Scrimgeour is going but says nothing ("he was not going to help Scrimgeour get there"). Scrimgeour arrives at the crux of it all when he says that people *believe* Harry's the Chosen One, a hero, and that surely once Harry realizes this, he'll consider it his duty "to stand alongside the Ministry." Harry asks for clarification of "standing alongside" and is told it's nothing "onerous" ? just things which will give "the right impression." Offering the opportunity to speak with the Head of the Auror Office as incentive for Harry to pop in and out of the MoM, Scrimgeour makes the mistake of mentioning that it was Dolores Umbridge who had informed him of Harry's ambition to become an Auror. Unsurprisingly, at the mention of Umbridge's name, Harry begins to feel angry. He re-states Scrimgeour's request for what it truly is: a request for Harry to give the impression he's working for the Ministry. Scrimgeour is relieved that Harry seems to get it. But then Harry asks if that won't also imply that he *approves* of what the Ministry is doing. Well, yes, agrees Scrimgeour. Well, then, "no, I don't think that'll work," says Harry. "You see, I don't like some of the things the Ministry's doing." He mentions Stan Shunpike specifically. When told he's too young to understand such things, Harry notes that DD's not young but he agrees Stan shouldn't be in Azkaban. Catching on to Harry's position, Scrimgeour says, "You prefer ? like your hero, Dumbledore ? to disassociate yourself from the Ministry?" Harry replies that he does not want to be *used.* Scrimgeour attempts to trump this by saying it might be Harry's duty to be used, to which Harry responds that it might be Scrimgeour's duty to make sure people are really Death Eaters before locking them away. (Touche.) On a roll, Harry moves on to say, "You never get it right, you people, do you?" He raises his right fist, where the scarred phrase "I must not tell lies" can still be seen. "I haven't forgotten, Minister. ...I don't remember you rushing to my defense when I was trying to tell everyone Voldemort was back." Unsurprisingly, this brings silence. Changing tack a bit, Scrimgeour comes right out and asks what DD's up to, where he's been going when he leaves Hogwarts. Harry says he has no idea but also admits he wouldn't tell if he did know. "Dumbledore's man through and through, aren't you, Potter?" asks Scrimgeour. "Yeah, I am," says Harry, and he turns his back on Scrimgeour and walks away. QUESTIONS 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not ask the librarian? 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) would've learned about UVs? 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron & Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon her & Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron to F&G? Do you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing in" to Ron's love life from hers? 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help Draco? Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, relying upon others more? 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? 7. Who do you think, in the past, has issued invitations to Hermione for Christmas at the Burrow? Do you imagine Hermione invited herself? Ron invited her? Mrs. Weasley? Ginny? Or that it was simply assumed she'd go? What do you think happened this year? Was an invitation given and declined? Was it all so awkward between Ron & Hermione that she was not invited at all? 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience and/or are cruel? 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? 10. The scene with Harry, Arthur & Lupin is one which, when we look back upon it, is clearly setting us up for the tower scene. It is filled with the kinds of remarks and statements which feel like "great pronouncements" or "truths" or "key insights," such as "It comes down to whether you trust DD's judgment" and "But Dumbledore can make mistakes" and "You are determined to hate him, Harry" and "Has it occurred to you, Harry, that Snape was simply pretending??" Play those lines off one another, and you pretty much have the DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape camps after the tower scene, no? (As well as the "DD could NEVER have been that wrong about Snape" vs. "DD can make BIG mistakes" camps.) Comments? Additionally, Lupin makes some remarks here about Snape which surprised some fans. Was he speaking what he truly believed? Did you believe him? 11. It is clear, to Lupin anyway, that Harry is *hoping* that the HBP is his father. This is reinforced by the fact that Harry is disappointed when he checks the book's date and sees it's too old to have been his dad's era. Harry has also previously stated that the HBP is a better potions teacher than Snape. Why does Harry like the HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? And what does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has something changed in Snape, to have made him truly a lesser teacher now than then? Or is it simply the removal, for Harry, of Snape the person and their unpleasant history from the mix, so that he's seeing "pure teaching" in the book and not the personality of the teacher? 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why or why not? 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and then knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is determined not to give it to him. We see a Harry who I would argue is self-possessed, confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in sticking up for what he believes is right. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What did you think of Harry in this scene? 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if you like. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who would like to thank Penapart Elf, Potioncat, Jen R., Alla & Carol for their comments, suggestions and/or encouragement. NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 13:31:39 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:31:39 -0000 Subject: Snape brewing Wolfsbane. WAS:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: <20060522125329.51971.qmail@web86211.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152663 Irene: I could never believe in blackmailing Dumbledore, but even assuming that's possible... Do doctors like all of the patients they treat? Do they do it out of goodness of their hearts? No, they are doing it under direct orders of hospital manager, under the threat of losing their income. :-) Evil, evil people. I'll never be grateful to any one of them again, only to the people who order them around. I see it as a point in Snape's favour - that he is capable of doing what's necessary for the person that he clearly dislikes. Alla: Blackmailing Dumbledore? Neither am I, but Dumbledore who is able to issue a threat when necessary, I think I do believe in him. Especially since we know that Snape fought so hard against Lupin's appointment. But silly me thought that some doctors actually LIKE their jobs and want to make their patients feel better. Thanks for giving me a reason to be even more scared of doctors than I am now ( since I was a kid ), because believe it or not, I would NEVER go to the doctor, who does his job under the threat of losing his income. :) If Snape is able to brew potion for Lupin without any threats, which is entirely possible too, since I am simply speculating, THAT could be a point of his favor, but if Snape has no choice in the matter, I really don't see how that counts in his favor. Because I really don't see him wanting to leave the safety of Hogwarts at all, despite needing to teach those "brats". Maybe because spending time near Dementors is much worse than anything he has to do at Hogwarts? JMO, Alla, who would LOVE to see Snape in Azkaban forever at the end, but who is kind enough to Snapey to not wish Dementors being there. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 22 13:41:19 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:41:19 -0000 Subject: My own take on the Prank In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152664 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" Third, no one forced Snape to go. He made a conscious decision to go > against the rules, into likely danger, and with foreknowledge that he > was circumventing protections put in place and endorsed by the > Headmaster. Sirius did not bodily throw Snape under the tree. Snape > put himself in danger. He put himself into an obvious danger, or at > least into a danger that would have been obvious to anyone who had > thought about it; any one other than a young, impulsive, headstrong, > vengefull teen. Pippin: An otherwise factual summary veers into speculation. All we know about Snape's reason for entering the willow is this: "Well, of course, Snape tried it--". "Those are wallpaper words pasted over a very large gap in Lupin's recounting of what happened. Snape was young and vengeful, but he was *not* known for being impulsive and headstrong. He was known for being "clever and cunning enough to keep himself out of trouble" -- GoF ch 27. We've learned a great deal about the ways magic might induce someone to act against their interest, far too much to take it for granted that Snape was acting entirely of his own will, IMO. Of course if someone not only told him how to get inside the willow but compelled him to try, knowing that he would encounter the werewolf, that would be attempted murder. I agree that it wouldn't be Sirius's style. But Lupin's possible motive is once again being overlooked. He had no reason at all to risk his secret to play a prank on Snape. But he had very compelling reasons to be afraid of him. Snape had already found out part of Lupin's secret. He'd seen Madam Pomfrey taking Lupin to the willow, and he knew that Lupin disappeared every month. Snape was noted for his knowledge of the Dark Arts and had been taught how to recognize a werewolf. Now, AFAWK, Snape had discovered nothing more. But did Lupin know that? Snape has a nasty habit of letting on that he knows more than he really does. Put that together with Lupin's imagination and a guilty conscience, and Lupin had to be asking himself: What else has Snape seen? What if Snape has seen everything? What if he only needs proof? If he gets it, all four Marauders will be going to Azkaban for a long, long time. And it will all be Lupin's fault for leading them to become Animagi. It would be no use trying to impress all this on Sirius and James. They would laugh at Lupin's fear. Even if they understood the risk, it would only make defying it more fun for them. And then, maybe, Sirius tells Lupin that he's let Snape in on how to enter the tunnel. Serve him right if he gets killed. Well, if Snape *deserves* to die...it wouldn't be so wrong, would it, to make sure he finds his way into the shack at the appropriate time? If Lupin is caught, only he will be to blame. Only he will go to Azkaban. His friends, who risked everything for him, will be safe. And Lupin owes them so much. But after all, he might get away with it, and if Snape deserves to die, why shouldn't he? Snape's screams will be lost in the usual hullaballoo from the shack. Broken furniture and blood everywhere are the usual aftermath of a werewolf transformation. Transfigure the corpse into something else, smuggle it out of the shack, "borrow" James's invisibility cloak and arrange for the mangled body to turn up in the forest. Everyone knows there are werewolves in there. Lupin was young, thoughtless, carried away with his own cleverness --and it would be so *easy.* Pippin From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Mon May 22 13:46:44 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:46:44 -0000 Subject: Math Question: Horcruxes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152665 According to Prof. Slughorn you make a Horcrux by "splitting" your soul. So Riddle makes his 1st Horcrux. Now 50% of his soul is in horcrux #1 and 50% remains in his body. When Riddle makes the 2nd Horcrux, what is split? The soul piece which remained in his body after he made the 1st Horcrux? If so, that 50% soul piece is now split, so Horcrux #3 contains 25% of his soul and Voldmort retains 25% in his body. When he makes Horcrux #4 that 25% would again be split so that Voldemort retains 12.5% of his original soul and 12.5% is transferred to Horcrux #4. Extrapolating to the finish, Horcrux 6 would contain 3.125% of Voldemort's original soul and Voldemort is now left with only 3.125% of his original soul residing inside his body. Is that the way it works? Is my thinking on this too linear and not "magical" enough? Does this matter? Questions/comments/theories? Steven1965aaa From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 22 14:05:34 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 14:05:34 -0000 Subject: Winged boars (was Re:Wordplay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152666 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > > > > I think we have winged boars outside... > > :-) > > > > It's interesting that JKR always mentions them when Harry makes > > a 'conventional' arrival at the school. In PS, he arrives by boat > > and in COS by flying car. > > Finwitch: > > They have wings because this is Magical world, out of the '-- and maybe > pigs would fly' saying describing something hard to believe/unlikely to > happen. (like magic in real world?;) ) > > In addition, it's HOGwarts! What else would be guarding it? I guess the > boars have warts, too! > > As to why boars instead of regular pigs - because boars are WILD, > dangerous and not so domesticated -- and it's the boar that's the > *heraldic* animal! Geoff: The UK version is "pigs might fly" - conditional tense. I did point out the other day that 'hogwart" is JKR's spoonerising of "warthog" which is an African wild pig. off topic, I think Flanders and Swann did a song about the warthog in their Bestiary set. The point of my last paragraph which you quoted was that it is interesting that Jo Rowling actually makes a specific reference to the winged boars on the pillars on /every/ occasion that Harry comes through the gates on his way to the school which seems a bit of an overkill. We know that they are there, why reinforce our memory with a sledgehammer? From leslie41 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 14:11:25 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 14:11:25 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152667 > Lanval: > > As for 'unfair praise': I mean certain arguments along the way > of "Snape is only nasty to Harry because he has to make him strong; > deep down he really loves him..." Leslie41: Ooh, I would never say that. I don't think that Snape likes Harry at all. I would say that it is his intent to make him strong, but he doesn't do this out of affection for Harry. Irene has made this point well with regard to Snape's brewing of the wolfsbane potion, and I think it applies here too. Snape is doing his duty, because it's the right thing to do. > Lanval: > My memory is unfortunatly not as good as Dumbledore's, but right > now I remember Snape healing DD once in HBP, after the destruction > of the ring horcrux. Was there another scene? As I said, I don't > have the books around... Leslie41: I find this response slightly humorous. One time saving DD's life is apparently not enough for the Snape Haters. How many times would be? I'd cite them, but I doubt it would do any good. Certainly I don't think it would change your opinion of Snape. > Lanval: > His 'repeated saving' of Harry? Again, I remember one occasion. In > PS/SS. Snape was muttering a counter-curse. On what other occasions > does Snape save Harry's life? Again, once is apparently not enough. How many times would be? > Lanval: > As to Sirius, well... Nah. He only returned from that tropical > place, where he'd been enjoying the first bit of real freedom in > thirteen years, to be near Harry, and eat rats in a cave (though in > fairness it should be added that rats ARE edible). > Then he let the Order use his house, and agreed to stay locked up > in that nasty, creepy dwelling full of bad memories, living with > depression... because he felt that he might be of more use to his > godson there, than in some tropical vacation spot, or Antarctica, > or the Gobi desert. > Next Harry got himself in trouble, and Sirius rushed off to save > him. Sirius died in the fight. > > You're right. No big deal. Leslie41: I never said that Sirius Black didn't do anything to help Harry. I simply said Snape did *more*. > > > > > > > Leslie41: > > Well, it depends on what you want to condemn them of. Certainly > > that's not the incident in which we can accuse Black of attempting > > to get Snape eaten by a werewolf. > > > > But boy, those boys are nasty. Mean and malicious and nasty, > taking > > great pains to hunt down and publicly humiliate a fellow student > > who, at that point, is just keeping to himself. > > > > Lanval: > Yes and no. There's not much 'hunting down' involved, Snape sits > down nearby. But overall, agreed. > > > >Leslie41: > > I would condemn James and Sirius for being arrogant, thieving, > self- > > important, > > Lanval: > See, that's where you lose me. Arrogant, yes. Self-important, > definitely. > > But 'thieving'? Canon, please? > > >Leslie41 > >malicious a-holes, whose great joy in life is taken in > > socially eviscerating the less popular and less attractive just > > because they CAN. > > Lanval: > And here your argument leaves Canonland forever, and floats off into > the vast space of Creative Speculation. Canon, please, for Sirius > and James' foremost joy in life being the social destruction of all > the less popular and attractive? > > >Leslie41: > > Did they stay that way? Probably not. Lily, who I have great > > respect for just on the basis of that scene, came around to > falling > > in love with James, and I would think that it must have been he > who > > changed, not her, because I find it hard to believe she would have > > married him if he didn't. Sirius, of course, is broken by > Azkaban, > > and he's lost his looks, but he's still got a strong streak of > > arrogance and meanness in him. > > Lanval: > > Can you point me to where in canon Sirius, post-POA, displays strong > meanness toward anyone but Snape (and, on one occasion to Harry)? > > > > > Lanval: > > > > > Big difference for me. Sirius only had to blurt > > > out the instructions on how to get past the Whomping > > > Willow, in a moment of utter frustration > > [snip] > > > Snape on the other hand joined the DEs. That requires thought, > > > intent, and conscious decision-making. > > > > houyhnhnm: > > > > So, if I understand correctly, you are saying that you feel it is a > > combination of the degree of intention and the level of animosity > that > > determines how much responsibility someone bears for the evil > > consequence of an action. > > Lanval: > If you're asking, do I consider intent, malice aforethought, > scheming, etc., to be important when assessing a deed that > results/may have resulted in dire consequences? Er, yes. So does the > court system where I live. They make some distinction between first > and second degree murder, manslaughter, criminal negligence, > accident, and so on. > > > houyhnhnm: > > It may turn out to be the case that Rowling agrees with that, but I > > hope not, because I don't. To use a RL example, I don't see any > > difference in culpability between someone who thoughtlessly gets > > behind the wheel of a motor vehicle while drunk and kills someone, > and > > one who kills out of rage. > > > > Lanval: > That's bit of a flawed example. The victim of a drunk driver doesn't > have much of a choice. Snape HAD a choice. He could have stayed in > his bed where he belonged. > > > houyhnhnm: > > I regard Snape as being responsible for the actions of LV and the > > Death Eaters, including the deaths of the Potters, whether he > > particapated in any of their murders or not. Simply by joining > them, > > he gave them his sanction. > > > Lanval: > Wow, you're harsher on him than I am. If we ever find out that Snape > did not, in fact, participate personally in any torture or killing, > then I will hold him less culpable than those who did, or those who > ordered it. > > > > houyhnhnm: > > Sirius was not guilty of murder, only because James stepped in. > > > Lanval: > Sirius was not guilty of 'murder', period. James or no James. > > > houyhnhnm: > Nor > > were he, Lupin, James, or Peter guilty of the murder of innocent > > Hogwarts students, Hogsmeade inhabitants, or Muggles, while out on > > their monthly escapades, only because they were lucky. Had Lupin > > gotten away from the others and killed someone, I would consider > them > > all guilty. > > Lanval: > Of murder? All of them? > > If something had happened to Harry and Draco in PS/SS on the night > of their detention in the forest... would Hagrid be guilty of > murder? It was, after all, a pretty stupid place to take kids for > detention. > > Are Crabbe and Goyle guilty of murder for helping Draco in HPB? Is > Draco guilty of murdering DD, since his actions ultimately, and > according to plan, led to the events on the tower? > > > houyhnhnm: > Lupin was certainly guilty of abandoning his duties as a > > prefect. They were all guilty of deceiving Dumbledore and putting > > others at great risk, of escalating the conflict between themselves > > and Snape, and possibly of pushing him into the arms of the Death > Eaters. > > > > Lanval: > No one pushed Snape. He became a DE because he WANTED to become a > DE. He, and he alone, was ultimately responsible for that decision. > Neville is bullied constantly by Snape and his grandmother, and has > yet to show DE tendencies. > > > houyhnhnm: > > Snape is a sympathetic character for me, not because he is not > > responsible for what happened during VWI, but because he alone > appears > > to own the responsibility for his actions. The others never do. > > > > Lanval: > > Sirius accepts responsibility for James' and Lily's death, even > though he did not betray them. Dumbledore freely accepts blame for > several things. Lupin agrees that he's too dangerous and unreliable > to teach at Hogwarts. That's just a few examples. > > Snape? We hear from DD that he felt remorse, and switched sides. > That's it. He tells Bellatrix that he "spun DD a tale of deepest > remorse." What to believe? > > > > > > > > > Alla: > > > Where does Snape own responsibility for his actions? Instead of > > > going to Azkaban to pay his dues for his DE days, he gets a nice > > > job of Hogwarts professor and Dumbledore's protection. > > > > Leslie41: > > There is owning up to one's responsibility with words, and then > > there is owning up to one's responsibility with *actions.* > > > > Would *you* like to trade places with Snape, and be a double agent > > and spy on Voldemort? "Dumbledore's protection" indeed. > > Dumbledore's the one who's sending him out to spy for the order, > > often insisting that Snape do things he most obviously would > rather > > not do. Name someone who has a more dangerous job. Just one name > > will do. > >\ > > Lanval: > Remus Lupin? Emmeline Vance? > > > > > Leslie41: > > And just how did nasty, unapologetic Snape end up at the whomping > > willow? Was he spying on Lupin, or looking for goods on Harry? > No. > > Snape, consistently responsible SNAPE, realizes that Lupin has > > missed his wolfsbane. Not only has he brewed it, he brings it to > > Lupin personally to see to it he takes it. > > > > Lanval: > Um, from what I remember, Snape brings Lupin the potion at an > earlier time as well, and never loses a word about Lupin 'having > forgotten to take it". Seems part of the arrangement, that Snape > will deliver the potion when it's ready. > > (Does anyone truly believe that Snape brews this potion out of the > goodness of his heart? Or could it be that DD asked/ordered him to > do so?) > > I also distinctly recall Snape gloating about how LUCKY he was to > find Lupin gone -- and the map on the table. Lucky, because Snape > understood what it meant. Lucky because it meant "two more for > Azkaban tonight", maybe even for for a little Kiss. > > Nope, Snape does not end up in the Shrieking Shack because he > worries about dear Remus taking his potion. Nor is he there to > protect Harry. His purpose is to catch Black and Lupin. > > > > > > > > Leslie41: > > Ah, but that's a matter that's been hashed over many times, and > it's > > by no means clear that Snape is the bad guy. Only Book VII will > > tell. > > Lanval: > And if he turns out to be DDM, that's fine with me. I'm still on the > fence. But I'll never like the guy. > From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon May 22 14:35:40 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 14:35:40 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152668 > > QUESTIONS > 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's > curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not ask > the librarian? Because, looking things up from books is what Hermione does, not what Harry/Ron do. In this case, Harry asks Ron because well, he apparently has some *experience* in the matter. Besides, I don't think Harry's after knowing things books would tell, such as how wiz. world views it, why would anyone do it etc. The name alone says what it is (and Harry has personal experince about Magically Binding Contracts ala Triwizard Cup, so - he really doesn't need book definitions, does he?) > 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted > Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get > Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were > doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) > would've learned about UVs? Probably some sort of never-tell-mom-on-us or, as Ron did nothing to stop the twins in OOP when they tested their Sneaking Snacks on first- years, something that might have that effect. They might even have gotten one in before Arthur caught them. As to how they figured out... Arthur himself might have told them of such things existing as part of homeschooling - not intending they go round and test it on their ignorant younger sibling of course... > 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron & > Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon her & > Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron to F&G? Do > you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing in" to Ron's > love life from hers? Well -- Ginny's the one who enlisted Fred&George's help when Harry needed to talk with Sirius. 'Growing up with Fred&George, you learn that just about anything's possible if you've got enough nerve.' And when Ron&Harry had that falling-out in GoF, Ron spent his time with the twins. So it's clear that both Ginny&Ron seek for twins for the elder-brother advice, help and support when they need it. (Bill&Charlie are away. Percy thinks that role should be his - but sees only too clearly it's F&G who have the role for Ron&Ginny... - and covets them. Just look at that "Ginny has other brothers to set her an example, Mother" - or the letter he wrote to Ron -- my footsteps vs. Fred&George-route) > 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the > kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about > others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? Oh, Fred *does* care. That's why he calls Percy a prat, too - for insulting their mother's feelings. George is the one who's better at expressing this care for others, but I'm certain Fred shares those feelings, even if he only nods by George's side. > 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to > tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help Draco? > Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, relying > upon others more? I think Harry learned the hard way in OOP that people will believe better if they know all the details than just a vague description over what happened... and that's why he never has to suffer just distrust. > 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape > is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get > information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's > that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's > statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these > years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is > the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the > fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When > is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry > correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? Well... You can fool your motives (a la Crouch Jr. as Moody), you can learn to hide your emotions, but I doubt even Snape can act emotions he truly doesn't feel on the subject. (and Harry's learned to read Snape's emotions - particularly his hatred of Harry, probably because they show on Snape even as they do on Vernon...) > 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by > the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience > and/or are cruel? Considering that Gnomes are pests, not really cruel. Besides the gnome had bit Fred, hadn't it? Besides, I don't think stunning and paint actually hurt it at all. > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and > welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds > Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet > over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not > have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? I think there's six faults on one side and half a dozen on the other on this case, which happens to be cultural contrast. Fleur may be culturally conditioned to be free and frank in her verbal expressions of her opinions and feelings... and manners do vary from culture to culture. > 11. Why does Harry like the > HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? And what > does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has something changed in > Snape, to have made him truly a lesser teacher now than then? Or is > it simply the removal, for Harry, of Snape the person and their > unpleasant history from the mix, so that he's seeing "pure teaching" > in the book and not the personality of the teacher? Well, I suppose it's simply that Snape's personality - and his emotions to Harry's father (and Harry by association) have quite effectively hindered Harry's learning. Besides, when Harry DID make a good/decent potion in OOP, Snape found a way to mark it zero. (causing it to fall and break). > 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? Because Ministry and wizards in general have prejudices against them - whereas Voldemort at least accepts them. In addition the werewolves appear to be moving as a pack, not suffering locked up in a cellar... and pack helps. (Something Lupin said about his animagi friends helping him keep his mind by being there...) > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't > stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why > or why not? I don't think Molly cares for the 'story' one way or other. She's just happy to see her son back again. > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good > but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his > behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? What he is? Well -- misguided by his own ambitions, in part. Proud, yes. And cast off by his siblings - he just never found a decent role amongst them, except for his deference to his elder brothers, such as Bill. > 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and then > knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is determined not to > give it to him. We see a Harry who I would argue is self- possessed, > confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in sticking up for what he > believes is right. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or > was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What > did you think of Harry in this scene? Oh yes, he's done a bit growing up, indeed. Which is what we've seen in every single book so it's expected of sorts. I really liked Harry here... Can't wait to see what 17-year-old Harry will be like. > 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if > you like. Scrimgeour is well - ambitious, yes. He appears to be taking not a denial-Fudge approach, but Crouch Sr - arrest too many- approach. I don't like either. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 14:31:42 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 14:31:42 -0000 Subject: Oops! Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD (continued) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152669 > > Leslie41: > > I would condemn James and Sirius for being arrogant, thieving, > > self-important, > > Lanval: > See, that's where you lose me. Arrogant, yes. Self-important, > definitely. > > But 'thieving'? Canon, please? Leslie41: The Snitch James is playing with--showing off with to be more precise- -is stolen. When asked where he got it (by Sirius), James says he "nicked it". If I'm not mistaken (and I'm not), this is British idiom for "taken without permission". Stolen. Granted, it's not a mammoth theft. James, like the Weasley Twins, is only a petty thief. But it's definitely canon. > > Leslie41 > > malicious a-holes, whose great joy in life is taken in > > socially eviscerating the less popular and less attractive just > > because they CAN. > > Lanval: > And here your argument leaves Canonland forever, and floats off > into the vast space of Creative Speculation. Canon, please, for > Sirius and James' foremost joy in life being the social destruction > of all the less popular and attractive? Leslie41: Well, Lily seems to think so. When she upbraids the pair she's not just referring to Snape, I think. This is what she says to James before she stalks off: 'Messing up your hair because you think it looks cool to look like you've just got off your broomstick, showing off with that stupid Snitch, walking down corridors and hexing anyone who annoys you just because you can - I'm surprised your broomstick can get off the ground with that fat head on it. You make me SICK.' The "anyone who annoys you just because you can" seems to me to indicate that Snape is not the only victim of James Potter's abuse. The haphazard way in which Sirius and James end up violating Snape in this chapter (because he's there and because he exists--by James' own admission) makes me think that he just happens to be the most obvious target here. They'd prefer to bother Snape. But if it's not Snape it's going to be someone else. Lily knows this. James Potter and Sirius Black are that particular brand of high school social predator that many of us dreaded, or hated. The weaker among us admired them. The strongest among us confronted them. Lily is my hero. My argument is strongly supported by canon, not "speculative" at all. > Lanval: > Can you point me to where in canon Sirius, post-POA, displays > strong meanness toward anyone but Snape (and, on one occasion to > Harry)? Leslie41: Kreacher. Dumbledore even comments on Sirius' nastiness towards him, and suggests it's unwarranted. From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon May 22 15:03:29 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 15:03:29 -0000 Subject: Math Question: Horcruxes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152670 -steven1965aaa: > According to Prof. Slughorn you make a Horcrux by "splitting" your > soul. So Riddle makes his 1st Horcrux. Now 50% of his soul is in > horcrux #1 and 50% remains in his body. > > When Riddle makes the 2nd Horcrux, what is split? The soul piece > which remained in his body after he made the 1st Horcrux? If so, > that 50% soul piece is now split, so Horcrux #3 contains 25% of > his soul and Voldmort retains 25% in his body... > Is that the way it works? Is my thinking on this too linear and > not "magical" enough? Does this matter? > Questions/comments/theories? Amiable Dorsai: I can think of a few possibilities, assuming that mundane mathematics applies to souls. Since Riddle knew what he planned to do from the beginning, perhaps he contrived to split off only a seventh of his original soul for each Horcrux. Or it could be that, in some sense, the soul fragments remain connected--the "Harry is a Horcrux" crowd maintain that this connection is what actually links Harry to Voldemort--so, there's no reason to believe that the fragments wouldn't equilbrate over time. In other words, the half soul would "drain" into the quarter souls until they were all thirds of souls, and so on as the splitting progressed. A third possibility is that, after a splitting, Riddle plays Ray Charles CDs until he's absorbed enough soul to make another Horcrux. Amiable Dorsai From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 13:55:14 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:55:14 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: <20060522114651.18485.qmail@web86203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152671 Irene: > So if someone is only mean to two people, it does not > make him mean, right? Did I get your argument > correctly? Lanval: No, you did not. I'm not talking about 'someone', I'm talking about Sirius, and only Sirius, and about two very specific cases in Sirius' life. Actually, come to think of it, there are also Kreacher and Mrs Black. He's mean to them, too. The poor things. Make that four cases. Must I get into details here? Then there is Snape. Sirius and Snape haved loathed and fought one another (as JKR says, the loathing was entirely mutual) since they were kids; put them in one room, as in OotP, and they'll start going at it like two tomcats. The other case I recall is Harry, on one occasion ONLY. Sirius makes a rather hurtful remark about Harry not being like his dad. All this hardly makes Sirius the owner of a mean streak. Yet this charge that he is a superbly mean, aggressive person pops up with monotonous regularity. But I may be wrong, perhaps there are scenes I've forgotten. Irene: > Brilliant, because that should close all the "Snape > the mean teacher" arguments forever. He is only mean > to Harry and Neville, ergo, he is not mean. ;-)))) > Lanval: Uh, are we still in Potterverse here? Snape is only mean to Harry and Neville, you say? Yes, to all others he's a regular little ray of sunshine, is our Sevvie... *picks herself up from the floor* Thanks for the laugh. :) > > > > > Nope, Snape does not end up in the Shrieking Shack > > because he > > worries about dear Remus taking his potion. Nor is > > he there to > > protect Harry. His purpose is to catch Black and > > Lupin. > > And what is wrong with that? Black is a convicted > criminal on the run, and Snape suspects Lupin of > aiding him (quite justified in his suspicions too; > Lupin was in fact helping Black, by witholding > information). > > Irene > Lanval: I was responding to claims that Snape went to the Shrieking Shack for other reasons than vengeance -- such as reminding Lupin to drink his potion. Nothing is wrong with Snape's actions, from a WW legal point. He had every right to go after Sirius and try to catch him. Though I would object, again, to the word 'convicted criminal'. I can't even get all that upset at Snape's obvious glee at catching Black and Lupin. Lord knows Snape can hold a grudge, and I would certainly not have very cuddly feelings toward two people whom I suspect of once having conspired to kill me -- because I DO believe that Snape is truly convinced that Sirius tried to kill him as a teenager. I simply, as an outsider, happen to disagree with that assessment. That he refuses, foaming at the mouth, to listen to ANY sort of reasoning from anyone, that Sirius MAY be innocent, however -- that's what I find morally questionable, to say the least. From lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk Mon May 22 14:06:32 2006 From: lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk (Tara Tierney) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 14:06:32 -0000 Subject: My own take on the Prank In-Reply-To: <20060521170714.2587.qmail@web61322.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152672 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Joe Goodwin wrote: > In fact we see the scene again in some ways when Draco follows > Harry, Ron and Hermione to Hagrid's hut just so he can tell > McGonagall. > Lunasa: I was thinking that myself actually. And everyone one involved got punished. All four kids got points taken away for snooping about the grounds in the middle of the night. Or was it detention? Even if Sirius' trick was just along the lines of telling Snape whatever was in the Shrieking Shack was far too dangerous for him, you can be sure the first thing Snape did was rush off to Dumbledore. If Dumbledore didn't find out that Sirius and James were animagus until PoA, and Lupin was meant to be keeping the Shack and his conditio completely secret, how did James and Sirius explain away their presence in the Shack on a full moon? From empress.najwa at gmail.com Mon May 22 15:49:08 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 15:49:08 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152673 adzuroth wrote: > Am I the only one who thinks there's something a wee bit wrong with the > belief that Dumbledore suddenly got tired of living and decided to die > on his knees at the hands of Snape, begging for his life? I always > thought DD had a little more pride than that, and would have prefered > to look Snape square in the eye and say "just do what you've gotta > do". DD more than likely wanted the rest of the wizarding world to > believe he was dead so Voldy and the DE's would have a huge false sense > of security. They would then become much bolder than ever before, > which would lead them to make mistakes that Harry could capitalize on. > Besides, if DD really believed he was going to die he could at any time > have summoned the house elves to defend him (and no, you don't need a > wand for that). There's much more to DD's so-called death scene than > meets the eye. Has there ever been another instance where pumping a > ton of emotions into an unforgivable curse resulted in an additional > effect on top of its intended result? As far as I know the answer is > no. If you hit someone with the killing curse, they simply fell over > dead as opposed to getting knocked backwards over a battlement. > > P.S.- anyone have an idea as to why JKR called the undead inferi > instead of using the more popular nomenclature of zombies? > > Adzuroth > Najwa now: I don't think he got tired of living and begged for death, I cannot begin to understand why this death was needed, but I highly doubt he would die in that manner to snape without there being a reason that he knew that he must die at that moment, perhaps to let LV think that he can get his way with harry and Hogwarts. But the death scene is a strange one, so instead of looking at it like he begged snape to kill him because he was tired of living, I say that snape was hesitating and Dumbledore was somehow telepathically telling him that he needed to kill him, because of the unbreakable vow and because he needed to stay on as a double agent, and not die because he broke his word to narcissa. do you see what i'm getting at? When he said "severus please..." i do not think he was begging for snape to save his life either. we won't know what went down that night until the next book. Najwa From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 22 16:12:41 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 16:12:41 -0000 Subject: My own take on the Prank In-Reply-To: <20060521170714.2587.qmail@web61322.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152674 Joe: > In fact we see the scene again in some ways when Draco follows > Harry, Ron and Hermione to Hagrid's hut just so he can tell > McGonagall. Magpie: I agree Draco in PS/SS (where he's spying on the Trio etc.) does remind me of what we hear of Snape from Sirius and with the Prank. It certainly sounds like he was trying to get them in trouble. Though that also brings up a whole host of other things to think about for me, because I don't think Draco does follow them just so he can tell McGonagall. He only tells McGonagall when he gets caught himself. Draco throughout PS/SS, to me, seems to want far more to be in on it than he does to be telling on it. In Snape's case we're talking much later in his school career when the fight had escalated, but it does make me wonder just how his fight with James started, if there was any perceived rejection on Snape's part. It may be very different underneath the surface similarities, though, because all four boys in question are very different people. What's actually a bit funny that I just thought of is that, you know, what about Dumbledore getting in trouble? Little Snape could have caused a whole lot of trouble back then, similar to the way his telling on Lupin in PoA gets him fired. Dumbledore's snuck a werewolf into the school? One who, it might come out, has in fact been roaming the countryside with three other students every full moon? However did Dumbledore get Snape to keep the secret? Especially in a way that MWPP never seemed to appreciate? -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 16:19:39 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 16:19:39 -0000 Subject: 'Filch is failed wizard' quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152675 katssirius wrote: > > POA Chapter seven "Filch was the Hogwarts caretaker, a bad-tempered, > failed wizard who waged a constant war against the students and, > indeed, Peeves." > > This has definitely been through the Harry filter and cannot be trusted as evidence for whether or not Filch is a Squib. Thanks. I knew I hadn't invented that quote! I was looking for it because it matched or backed up Hermione's comment in HBP. We do have other evidence that Filch is a Squib, as previously noted, including Filch's own testimony and JKR's remarks on Squibs on her website, neither of which has "been through the Harry filter." (Even though he hears the words "I'm a Squib," he's not interpreting them. He doesn't even know at that point what a Squib is. Also, they're spoken in front of Snape, McGonagall, Dumbledore and a number of other people who almost certainly already know this information.) My question was whether "failed wizard" was synonymous with "Squib." Potioncat thinks (if I'm reading her post correctly) that Squibs are wholly nonmagical (see Ron's definition in CoS, which I quoted upthread) and that Hermione's remark about Filch not being a very good wizard is incompatible with his being a Squib. I'm suggesting that Squibs (the only two we know are Filch and Mrs. Figg) may have some residual magical ability (communicating with cats, for example) and that one of them (Figgy, I hope) will be the person who performs magic at an advanced age under perilous circumstances. If so, "failed wizard" (or "failed witch," since Figgy has clearly attempted Transfiguration and failed to Transfigure so much as a teabag) could be another way of describing a Squib--born of magical parents but with only a trace of magical ability. At any rate, the chronological evidence pretty much eliminates the possibility that Filch could be Tobias Snape, if that's what you're arguing. He was already caretaker when Severus Snape was still in school. Also, I doubt that any Muggle could have an apparently psychic relationship with a cat, and yet we see that both Filch and Figgy have this ability. (It reminds me of Sirius Black's ability to communicate with Crookshanks when he's in dog form. "The cat told me . . . .") Thanks again for finding the quote. PoA is probably the last place I would have looked for it. Carol, glad to know that she didn't imagine that quote and trying to clarify her reason for wanting it From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Mon May 22 16:52:55 2006 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (P. Alexis Nguyen) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:52:55 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Math Question: Horcruxes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152676 steven1965aaa: > > Is that the way it works? Is my thinking on this too linear and > > not "magical" enough? Does this matter? > > Questions/comments/theories? As much as I like Amiable Dorsai's theory about the Ray Charles CDs, I really think that the explanation is a lot more mundane. While the books do refer to "splitting" the soul, is there anywhere that states that the soul is split in half? I always thought that smaller pieces of soul break off when you do the killing, possibly size having some correlation to the degree of evil committed, and the larger piece remaining with the corporeal body while the smaller piece [at the time] would be used to make the horcrux. I don't know. It's what I've always perceived as how that whole soul-splitting thing worked. ~Ali From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 22 17:01:10 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 17:01:10 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152677 "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > QUESTIONS > 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's > curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not ask > the librarian? Potioncat: Well, in the real world, we all hold librarians in the higest esteem, and frequently go to them for help in researching all sorts of things. They are far and away suprior to Google. The Hogwarts librarian is, shall we say, not up to the same standard? Someone like Hermione might be able to carry on without Madam Pince's help, or might know how to best frame a question to get some reasonable results, but Harry wouldn't have that ability/interest. [Potioncat would like to say that a list elf who will remain nameless is a librarian, so it would be best not to flood the board with stories of "bad librarians." Should anyone have such a story, that is.] > > 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted > Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get > Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were > doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) > would've learned about UVs? Potioncat: Oh, wouldn't I like to know? First off, are UVs Dark? (UV rays do block the sun...nevermind) Arthur must have had some reason to lose his temper. Ron states it's the only time he has. Arthur must have really thought something would come of it, but these were little kids!!! The UV requires a wand, and certain words and controlled magic....Did he really think they would succeed? OR, Arthur himself was involved in a UV that caused some sort of unpleasant flashback and his anger was over the top. > > 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron & > Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon her & > Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron to F&G? Do > you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing in" to Ron's > love life from hers? Potioncat: She seems close to them. I think she'd rather have Hermione as Ron's love interest and was hoping for some help. > > 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the > kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about > others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? Potioncat: The family is so hurt by Percy, so severely hurt, that Fred knew it would hurt his mother even more to say anything in front of her. That doesn't stop his anger or his opinion about Percy. But I thought it was interesting that there was a chance of Percy's coming for Christmas and that Molly's excuse was that he was busy. > > 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to > tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help Draco? > Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, relying > upon others more? Potioncat: Finally! Too little, too late it seems. > > 6. "They didn't hear him. No one's > that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's > statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these > years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is > the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the > fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When > is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry > correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? Potioncat: I think he is, for this reason. DDM!Snapers heard the words and gave them one set of meanings. OFH/ESE!Snapers gave them different set of meanings. Even the phrase, "Where do you think I would have been all these years..." seems to have a double meaning. > > 7. Who do you think, in the past, has issued invitations to Hermione > for Christmas at the Burrow? Do you imagine Hermione invited > herself? Ron invited her? Mrs. Weasley? Ginny? Or that it was simply > assumed she'd go? What do you think happened this year? Was an > invitation given and declined? Was it all so awkward between Ron & > Hermione that she was not invited at all? Potioncat: It could have been either Ron or Ginny. In the past they were buddies. But I've seen (in my own kids) friendships come and go. I think that either no invitation was issued, or Ginny invited and Hermione declined. Or it could be explained away by Hermione having to spend some time with her parents. > > 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by > the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience > and/or are cruel? Potioncat: I thought the method for getting rid of them was bad enough! I'm sure I wouldn't want one on my tree. This sort of thing reminds me that we have a cultural base for witches/wizards being mean/spiteful/unkind and from time to time, JKR seems to be reminding us of that. > > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and > welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds > Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet > over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not > have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? Potioncat: I thought Fleur was being rude. But when I really looked at the lyrics, I wasn't so sure: Oh, come and stir my cauldron, > And if you do it right, > I'll boil you up some hot strong love > To keep you warm tonight. It reminds me of rap lyrics, and if it was my kids listening to it, I'd want to turn it off too! It also sounds like a cough*lovepotion*cough. My first reaction was that Molly didn't like Fleur but she was trying to be nice to her. I didn't see that Fleur was trying to be nice back. But someone else has mentioned it was most likely even. Fleur didn't get a sweater, I wonder what Molly did give her? We know Molly can be petty (Hermione's Easter egg), but would Fleur have wanted a sweater? > > 10. Additionally, > Lupin makes some remarks here about Snape which surprised some fans. > Was he speaking what he truly believed? Did you believe him? Potioncat: It did set us up didn't it, and it was pretty well repeated afterwards by the Order members. I thought it was interesting that Lupin referred to Snape as "Severus." I think he did call him by first name in PoA, but I was surprised that he referred to him that way. Also it was interesting that Lupin mentions it as James&Sirius vrs Severus, as if he and Peter were no part of the animosity at all. I find it hard to believe that he can neither like nor dislike Severus. I could understand not liking but respecting, or not liking but appreciating. I don't know. The moment Lupin was described as listening in to Harry and Arthur my ESE!Lupin radar went off. (It's all Pippin's fault.) > > 11. It is clear, to Lupin anyway, that Harry is *hoping* that the > HBP is his father. This is reinforced by the fact that Harry is > disappointed when he checks the book's date and sees it's too old to > have been his dad's era. Harry has also previously stated that the > HBP is a better potions teacher than Snape. Why does Harry like the > HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? And what > does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has something changed in > Snape, to have made him truly a lesser teacher now than then? Or is > it simply the removal, for Harry, of Snape the person and their > unpleasant history from the mix, so that he's seeing "pure teaching" > in the book and not the personality of the teacher? Potioncat: Harry was helped by his father (or so he thought) in PoA, and I think he was hoping for another connection with James. Wouldn't that just be cool, that the father he can't remember is still there, helping him learn magic? It makes it so much more ironic that it's Snape who is helping him. I think Harry is accepting the notes written by a boy who so much like himself. I wonder if Harry will ever think of Snape as having been a teenager with similar problems.....(what world am I on, of course he won't!) I think Snape worked out better ways of making the potions, but not good ways of teaching them. I think it's very interesting that Lupin doesn't recognise the nickname. So, it appears Snape's nickname was only for himself, or the Slytherins did a better job of protecting code names. It also sort of blows my theory that the Marauders had Severus's book for a while. > > 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? Potioncat: Werewolves like Fenrir would have a better supply of meat. OOh, Yuck. I didn't just say that, did I? > > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't > stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why > or why not? Potioncat: It's very hard not to believe the best in your child, even when no else does. > > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good > but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his > behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? Potioncat: I really expected to see more of Percy by now. I used to think he was working for DD, and he may be. But I don't think he's ESE. I think he sought a different path than the rest of his family.(I'm still hoping it includes DD.) Of course, it would be just Snape's luck that the one person who knows why DD trusted Snape is Percy, and of course, no one would trust Percy either. > > 15. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or > was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What > did you think of Harry in this scene? Potioncat: We've seen several moments of strength and maturity in Harry. This was a big one. It's different from his encounters with Fudge in PoA. Great job Susan! From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon May 22 17:40:48 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 17:40:48 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152678 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Adzuroth" wrote: > > > Am I the only one who thinks there's something a wee bit wrong with the belief that Dumbledore suddenly got tired of living and decided to die on his knees at the hands of Snape, begging for his life? I always thought DD had a little more pride than that, and would have prefered to look Snape square in the eye and say "just do what you've gotta do". DD more than likely wanted the rest of the wizarding world to believe he was dead so Voldy and the DE's would have a huge false sense of security. They would then become much bolder than ever before, which would lead them to make mistakes that Harry could capitalize on. Besides, if DD really believed he was going to die he could at any time have summoned the house elves to defend him (and no, you don't need a wand for that). There's much more to DD's so-called death scene than meets the eye. Has there ever been another instance where pumping a ton of emotions into an unforgivable curse resulted in an additional effect on top of its intended result? As far as I know the answer is no. If you hit someone with the killing curse, they simply fell over dead as opposed to getting knocked backwards over a battlement. > > P.S.- anyone have an idea as to why JKR called the undead inferi > instead of using the more popular nomenclature of zombies? Tonks: DD was not begging for his life. He did not summon the house elves or Fawkes for a reason. Whether or not you agree with my interpretation of the Christian symbols (see post #151730) there are still good reasons as to why the events on the tower happened as they did. DD saved Harry, Draco, and Snape by dying. And DD is really dead. It would serve no good purpose to pretend to be dead and leave the WW in such grief and the school possibly closed. That would be a coward's way, and DD is not a coward. Snape saved DD's body from being eaten by Greybeck by doing a non- verbal to send him over the edge. And inferni are the soul of the damned in hell. Or of the shades in Hades. Tonks_op From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 17:29:45 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 17:29:45 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152679 > > Lanval: > > > > As for 'unfair praise': I mean certain arguments along the way > > of "Snape is only nasty to Harry because he has to make him strong; > > deep down he really loves him..." > > Leslie41: > Ooh, I would never say that. I don't think that Snape likes Harry at > all. I would say that it is his intent to make him strong, but he > doesn't do this out of affection for Harry. Irene has made this > point well with regard to Snape's brewing of the wolfsbane potion, > and I think it applies here too. > > Snape is doing his duty, because it's the right thing to do. > Lanval: I should have added that I hadn't seen that particular argument on this list -- I was thinking of online Potter Fandom in general. A scary place. This group is very sane and civilized by comparison. :) > > Lanval: > > His 'repeated saving' of Harry? Again, I remember one occasion. In > > PS/SS. Snape was muttering a counter-curse. On what other occasions > > does Snape save Harry's life? >Leslie_41: > Again, once is apparently not enough. How many times would be? Lanval: Well, see, I'm a bit nitpicky that way. When people claim that Snape 'repeatedly' saves Harry's and DD's life, then no -- once is not enough. And I don't really think of myself as a Snape Hater (though everyone is free to call me that, of course...*g*). I merely dislike him. And I'm unhappy with a certain part of fandom that gives Snape a pass where he doesn't deserve it. > Leslie41: > > I never said that Sirius Black didn't do anything to help Harry. I > simply said Snape did *more*. Lanval: I see we're going to have to disagree on that. However, just for fun, let's for a moment play alternate universe and imagine the following scenario: Sirius follows orders, and obediently stays behind at Grimmauld place, instead of going to the MoM -- but Snape goes, and dies fighting Bellatrix. Enter a hapless fan, claiming that "Snape could have done more for Harry". Oh dear. Oh my. Now, there's of course still the possibility in the future that Snape WILL die for Harry. I'll be admitting then that Snape did as much as Sirius. > > > > Lanval: > > See, that's where you lose me. Arrogant, yes. Self-important, > > definitely. > > > > But 'thieving'? Canon, please? > > Leslie41: > The Snitch James is playing with--showing off with to be more precise- > -is stolen. When asked where he got it (by Sirius), James says > he "nicked it". If I'm not mistaken (and I'm not), this is British > idiom for "taken without permission". Stolen. Granted, it's not a > mammoth theft. James, like the Weasley Twins, is only a petty > thief. But it's definitely canon. > Lanval: Still, a bit harsh to say this makes him a "thieving a-hole". But accepted. Doesn't apply to Sirius though. > > > Leslie41 > > > malicious a-holes, whose great joy in life is taken in > > > socially eviscerating the less popular and less attractive just > > > because they CAN. > > > > Lanval: > > And here your argument leaves Canonland forever, and floats off > > into the vast space of Creative Speculation. Canon, please, for > > Sirius and James' foremost joy in life being the social destruction > > of all the less popular and attractive? > > Leslie41: > Well, Lily seems to think so. When she upbraids the pair she's not > just referring to Snape, I think. This is what she says to James > before she stalks off: > > 'Messing up your hair because you think it looks cool to look like > you've just got off your broomstick, showing off with that stupid > Snitch, walking down corridors and hexing anyone who annoys you just > because you can - I'm surprised your broomstick can get off the > ground with that fat head on it. You make me SICK.' > > The "anyone who annoys you just because you can" seems to me to > indicate that Snape is not the only victim of James Potter's abuse. > The haphazard way in which Sirius and James end up violating Snape in > this chapter (because he's there and because he exists--by James' own > admission) makes me think that he just happens to be the most obvious > target here. They'd prefer to bother Snape. But if it's not Snape > it's going to be someone else. Lily knows this. James Potter and > Sirius Black are that particular brand of high school social predator > that many of us dreaded, or hated. The weaker among us admired > them. The strongest among us confronted them. Lily is my hero. > > My argument is strongly supported by canon, not "speculative" at all. Lanval: If you want to equal "hexing anyone who annoys you" with "social evisceration of the weak, the ugly and the unpopular" then, yeah, I guess it's supported. Personally, I see a world of difference. And I tend to be very wary of this kind of exaggeration. There's so much of it out in Fandom. Like those who firmly believe that the Marauders gang-raped Snape on a regular basis... > > Lanval: > > Can you point me to where in canon Sirius, post-POA, displays > > strong meanness toward anyone but Snape (and, on one occasion to > > Harry)? > > Leslie41: > Kreacher. Dumbledore even comments on Sirius' nastiness towards him, > and suggests it's unwarranted. Lanval: Yes. I'd forgotten about him. But if that nasty little sh*t had called me all those names, and insulted every single one of my friends the way Kreacher does, then I'd probably have drowned him in a bathtub. Just kidding, of course. But I can't blame Sirius for his attitude towards Kreacher. It wasn't smart, but it was understandable. One hardly needs to have a "mean streak" to get crotchety with that particular elf. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon May 22 17:44:54 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 17:44:54 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "logistis_20" wrote: > > DD was the strongest wizard of the century. He made many mistakes > but till his death he was trusting Severus. He was the person > who killed him. But why? He was the person who said the prophecy > to LV. So why he trust him? > > I can not understand him. > > I want to believe that DD would like to die like that. I want to > believe that DD was so badly heart from the ring that he should > die in that way. > > But not! I can not believe it. > > Why he should die like that? And why LV he want so badly to kill > DD? > > And the biggest question - who is RAB and what is the middle name > of Sirius' brother? > > Please forgive my English. > > "logistis_20" bboyminn: As to why Dumbledore trusted Snape...well, that is one of the greatest mysteries of the series. We can speculate and the books have given us hints, but always the true explanation is hidden from us. I don't believe that Dumbledore faked his death. Certainly that was the most dangerous, unlikely, and unreliable circumsance. If Dumbledore truly was plotting to fake his own death, he could have come up with a better plan than one involving Death Eater cooperation, Death Eaters in the castle endangering innocent students, and a most unlikely timing. So, I'm not buying any suggestions that the whole thing was an elaborate plan by Dumbledore to fake his death; too unrealistic. I do worry about the injury to Dumbledore's hand. Harry says several times that the hand looks dead. Dumbledore, as good as, said he would have been dead from the Cursed Ring if Snape hadn't prevented it. But, regardless of Snape's effort and certainly Madame Pomphry's too, Dumbledore's hand has not been cured. I suspect Snape only slowed the curse, and the 'dead hand' was gradually creeping up Dumbledore's arm, and once it got to his chest and his heart, or his brain, Dumbledore was dead anyway. Of course, I can't prove that, but it is suspicious that no one in the wizard world was able to repair Dumbledore's hand. So, in a sense, Snape knew he was killing a man who was nearly dead anyway. Further, there had been a delay in getting medical assistance to Dumbledore after he drank the potion from the cave. It may have already been to late to undo the effects of that potions. Dumbledore was very weak and appeared to be fading. I suspect Snape and Dumbledore used Dumbledore's impending death to their advantage. Snape is not absolutely and indisputable Voldemort's most trusted friend, since Snape got rid of Voldemort's greatest enemy and greatest threat. Now, let's consider that maybe Dumbledore's 'faked' death was not part of an elaborate plan, but was simply a reaction to the moment; a way to save the day. What plot purpose does it serve? In the end, Harry must 'go it alone', that is the genre, that is the standard theme for the hero, to be stripped of all his resources and to have to face his greatest enemy alone and unaided by his greatest protectors. What is Dumbledore going to do, reappear at the last minute and save Harry? That's kind of anti-climactic. We had Harry built up as the hero in 6 books only to have Dumbledore swoop in at the end, and snatch Harry's victory from him? Doesn't seem likely. So, how and under what circumstances does Dumbledore's fake death serve the plot and the story? I can't see it. If Dumbledore appears after the final defeat of Voldemort, I think Harry is going to feel a little betrayed. Here Dumbledore is off on a vacation, and Harry is left to fight alone. It's nice because the story ends with Dumbledore alive, but it doesn't seem pleasant from Harry's perspective. So, for now, until the last book proves otherwise, I think Dumbledore was already dying. Snape was backed into a corner and forced to either fight with great casualties and a very likely poor outcome, or he has to kill Dumbledore knowing that in doing so, even under the best of circumstances, he will be hated by the wizard world for all time. Yet, doing so gives Snape and the wizard world a strategic advantage. It's the kind of decision that is made all the time in war, you sacrifice the lives of many if in the long run it gives you an advantage that allows you to win. So, no great conspiricy, just Snape and Dumbledore reacting to the moment and accepting the inevitable actions that needed to be taken to achieve the best possible outcome from a strategic perspective. Dumbledore is a casualty of war. Snape is a victim of war. Yet, the hope is that, in the long run, their actions will lead to the defeat of Voldemort. So, lacking any acceptable explanation and strategic advantage for how and why Dumbledore would fake his death, I have to assume he really is dead. However, as many have pointed out, we still have Dumbledore's protrait. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 18:01:52 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 18:01:52 -0000 Subject: When did DD become headmaster? (Was: Pince/Filch) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152681 houyhnhnm: > > Filch was not there when Molly and Arthur Weasley were in school, but the old punishments were. "Your father and I had been for a nightime stroll," she said. "He got caught by Apollyon Pringle--he was the caretaker in those days--you father's still got the marks." (GoF31) > > This must have been before Dumbledore's time as headmaster. It seems reasonable that DD was the one who abolished the old punishments. Carol responds: I think we can determine the approximate date that Dumbledore became headmaster based on two things: Lupin's enrollment in Hogwarts as a first year, which would be in 1971 if I remember correctly, and (possibly) McGonagall's tenure as Transfiguration teacher, which would have begun when DD stopped teaching Transfiguration to become headmaster. That would be "thirty years ago this December" as of OoP, or December 1965 (which suggests a sudden replacement, as if someone had just died). But we also need to consider the dates for the Weasleys if Apollyon Pringle predates DD's tenure as headmaster. The problem here (for me) is the Weasley chronology. In GoF, Mrs. Weasley talks not only about Pringle, the former caretaker, but about Ogg, the gamekeeper before Hagrid. It used to be assumed that Hagrid was made gamekeeper, or maybe the gamekeeper's assistant, right after he was expelled from Hogwarts at the end of his third year (June 1945), but he evidently wasn't in that position yet when Arthur Weasley and Molly Prewett were in school. That would have made them older than Hagrid. But now we're told (HBP) that they got married right out of school when Voldemort first came to power, which would be around 1970 and would make them about the same age as Lucius Malfoy (which explains the rivalry between Lucius and Arthur in CoS--the Draco and Ron of their day.) The only way I can reconcile those apparently conflicting indicators of the Weasleys' age is to assume that Hagrid didn't become gamekeeper until after Dumbledore became headmaster. (If that's the case, we have a big gap for Hagrid, like the one with Lupin, during which he wasn't at Hogwarts and we don't know what he was doing. In Hagrid's case, the gap is about twenty-six years if he was hired in 1971.) At any rate, if we go for 1970 as the year the Weasleys got married (the Lexicon give Bill Weasley's birthdate as 1971), they would have been in school from 1963 to 1970, so both Ogg and Pringle would have held their positions until at least that date. Let's say that Dumbledore became headmaster at Dippett's death in 1970 or 1971, soon after the Weasleys left Hogwarts. We know that DD was there to admit eleven-year-old Remus Lupin in that year. Did Ogg and Pringle conveniently retire (or die) that same year? Did Dumbledore ease them out and substitute protected people of his own choice, the half-giant Hagrid and the Squib Filch, at the same time outlawing the old punishments (including whipping, manacles, and possibly Transfiguration)? How did Filch know about them, then, since he can't have attended Hogwarts? Surely the manacles on the walls would not be sufficient in themselves to indicate that the punishments had been *recently* abandoned. (Filch speaks with real longing of the "old days." How did he know? Was he Pringle's assistant?) Or, if Dumbledore became headmaster in 1965 when McGonagall became the Transfiguration teacher, why did he wait so long to get rid of Ogg and Pringle (especially Pringle, who seems like a real sadist) and substitute his own people? and why, if Filch had ever used whips and manacles on students, would DD hire him? Another of his famous second chances? And, assuming 1971 rather than 1965 for Dumbledore's appointment as headmaster because of the Weasleys and Apollyon Pringle, what about those six years when McGonagall was teaching Transfiguration but Dippett was still headmaster and Ogg and Pringle were gamekeeper and caretaker, respectively? Where was Dumbledore? Do we have a six-year gap for him, at exactly the time that the future Mr. and Mrs. Weasley and young Lucius Malfoy were in school? I absolutely agree that it was Dumbledore who abolished the old punishments (and IMO started using Hogwarts as a refuge for people he was trying to protect at about the same time). But when did that happen, why protect Filch, and how did Filch gain his familiarity with the "old ways" as practiced by Apollyon Pringle? Carol, noting that the *Charlie* Weasley chronology problem is unsolvable unless Gryffindor lost the cup every season that their second-best Seeker every played but wondering if this one can be worked out a little more logically From tigerfan41 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 18:06:06 2006 From: tigerfan41 at yahoo.com (Darrell Harris) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 11:06:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 7101 In-Reply-To: <1148314380.3091.2537.m26@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060522180606.70942.qmail@web52503.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152682 I wanted to make a couple of observations.Hopefully I've not violated any rules with this post. I believe Dumbledore is dead for one reason. His portrait appeared in the headmasters office. I don't know what went on with Snape in the tower. I dislike Snape but do believe his is Dumbledore's man through and through. So.... something wasn't as it seemed in that scene but with the portrait in place and the others following MM's instructions I can only believe DD is gone. As for the tossing of DD's body, we do know the killing curse can have tremendous physical effects from the destruction of the Potter's home to the damage in the ministry during the duel with DD. Is it possible to cast with degrees of power? Does anyone else think Snape used sectum sempre against James in the pensieve scene? The effects seem similiar. I've never felt comfortable with the whole "poor Snape being picked on for no reason" aspect of that memory. I have the feeling there was much history behind that fight with both sides giving and taking through the years. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 18:50:20 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 18:50:20 -0000 Subject: Abuse, etc., was Snape, Apologies, and and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152683 > > Alla: > > Harry did not learn about bezoar on Snape's lessons. Harry did not > learn about it while listening to Snape's insults. He read about it > in the book. > Carol responds: The bezoar lesson is part of the very first Potions lesson and is presented in a way that Harry and the others are unlikely to forget: "Let's try again, Potter, where would you look if I told you to find me a bezoar?" . . . "I don't know, sir?" "Thought you wouldn't open a book before coming, eh, Potter?" . . . "For your information, Potter, . . . a bezoar is a stone taken from the stomach of a goat and it will save you from most poisons" (SS Am. ed. (137-38). That's a very important piece of information, imparted specifically to Harry but overheard by the entire class. (Snape tells them to copy it down.) Nor has Harry forgotten this lesson. When he sees the HBP's cheeky little note, "Just stuff a bezoar down their throats," he remembers what a bezoar is *from that lesson*: "Harry stared at these words for a moment. Hadn't he once, long ago, heard of bezoars? Hadn't Snape mentioned them in their firts-ever Potions lesson? '*A stone taken from the stomach of a goat, which will protect from most poisons*'" (HBP am. ed. 377, italics in original). If it hadn't been for both Snape's original lesson and the HBP's marginal note, Harry would not have used a bezoar in that lesson nor would he have known that the same bezoar was what he needed to save Ron's life in "Birthday Surprises." So Professor Snape taught him what it was and what it was used for; Teen!Snape (the HPB) taught him how to use it. Slughorn at that moment is completely useless. It's Harry, armed with the knowledge Snape gave him (twice) who saves Ron's life. Quite simply, Ron would be dead if it were not for that very valuable lesson. It was also Snape who taught Harry (and others) Expelliarmus in the one and only session of the duelling club in CoS. And Expelliarmus saved him and Ron from Lockhart's memory charm. It also indirectly saved him from Voldemort in the graveyard and came in very handy in the MoM battle. FWIW, it was Snape who taught Hermione how to recognize a werewolf. I'm sure there are other valuable Snape lessons, but the bezoar is, of course, the most important. That it could have been imparted more tactfully is obvious. But perhaps, if it had simply been mentioned in passing in a lecture, or even if Snape's tone had been less sarcastic, the lesson would have been forgotten. What's important is that Harry remembered it. Had he not done so, Ron would almost certainly have died. Carol, noting that directly or indirectly, Snape saves four lives in HBP From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 18:42:37 2006 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 18:42:37 -0000 Subject: DD death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152684 > Adzuroth: > There's much more to DD's so-called death scene than > meets the eye. Has there ever been another instance where pumping a > ton of emotions into an unforgivable curse resulted in an additional > effect on top of its intended result? As far as I know the answer is > no. If you hit someone with the killing curse, they simply fell over > dead as opposed to getting knocked backwards over a battlement. We just don't have enough evidence to prove you right or wrong. Does, as you put it, "pumping a ton of emotions" into AK change the way it works? We don't know, because all the AKs that we witness in the books are pretty unemotional: 1. Fake Moody vs. spider - no emotion, just a demonstration. 2. Wormtail vs. Cedric - nothing personal. 3. Bellatrix vs. fox (we don't hear the words, but looks like AK) - just in case. 4. LV vs. Frank Bryce - no emotion, the Muggle is just a nuisance. Did I forget something? Anyway, the only AK that doesn't fit here (except for Snape's) is the curse that LV killed his father and grandparents with. I suppose there should be some emotion there, but from the description it seems more like an "unemotional" AK. OTOH, who knows with LV? Maybe he acted not so much out of anger, but more out of desire to destroy the people who were living proof of his impure blood. Some time ago I wrote about how some spells (Stunning and Disarming) in certain circumstances do more then they are supposed to. That post got lost, and I was too lazy to rewrite it. I still have all the quotes, but again , I'm too lazy to write all of it now. In short, the spell is usually "overdone" when several people use it at the same time, but sometimes there is only one caster who sends an opponent flying with Expelliarmus or Stupefy. Maybe AK works the same way. > Chrus: > The curse pushes you back, as for Sirius in OotP, and thus DD fell > down. This is supposed to back my previous statement, but, unfortunately, this example is not correct, IMO. I don't think Sirius was killed by AK. The spell is described as a jet of red light, not green , like AK. I believe it was a Stunning spell or something else, and Sirius was not killed by it, he just fell through the veil. The spell didn't kill him, the veil did, IMO. > Najwa: > But the death scene is a > strange one, so instead of looking at it like he begged snape to > kill > him because he was tired of living, I say that snape was hesitating > and Dumbledore was somehow telepathically telling him that he needed > to kill him, because of the unbreakable vow and because he needed to > stay on as a double agent, and not die because he broke his word to > narcissa. do you see what i'm getting at? When he said "severus > please..." i do not think he was begging for snape to save his life > either. Yeah, DD trusted Snape and didn't have any reason to beg for life before Snape even showed his intentions. If "Severus, please" came AFTER Snape pointed his wand at DD, it would have made sense, but not BEFORE Snape demonstrated any hostility. zanooda From leslie41 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 18:57:32 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 18:57:32 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152685 > > Lanval: > Well, see, I'm a bit nitpicky that way. When people claim that > Snape 'repeatedly' saves Harry's and DD's life, then no -- once is > not enough. Leslie41: Okay, here's one more. He prevents the other Death Eaters from killing Harry at the end of HPB. We could argue about "why," of course, depending on whether or not he's DDM, but he does it. Need more? Lanval: > And I don't really think of myself as a Snape Hater (though > everyone is free to call me that, of course...*g*). I merely > dislike him. And I'm unhappy with a certain part of fandom that > gives Snape a pass where he doesn't deserve it. Leslie41: I personally don't think I'm giving him a "pass." I have sound reasons for why I believe what I believe about him, why I accord him the respect and admiration I think he *deserves*. Many people seem to have the idea that if someone isn't likeable, they cannot be admirable or good. Niceness and likability are not at all related to whether or not a human being is a person of character. Snape is a person of character. But he's not nice. (And, just for the record, I don't like him either.) > Lanval: > Just for fun, let's for a moment play alternate universe and > imagine the following scenario: > > Sirius follows orders, and obediently stays behind at Grimmauld > place, instead of going to the MoM -- but Snape goes, and dies > fighting Bellatrix. > > Enter a hapless fan, claiming that "Snape could have done more for > Harry". > > Oh dear. Oh my. But Sirius didn't die "for" Harry. He ends up at the MoM fighting Bellatrix. I don't recall any point then at which he saves Harry from anyone or any thing there. Could be wrong though. I don't have my book here. Now, he does save Harry (et all) from Lupin in PoA. That's definitely true. But then Snape tries to save Harry (et al) from Lupin there as well. > Lanval: > > If you want to equal "hexing anyone who annoys you" with "social > evisceration of the weak, the ugly and the unpopular" then, yeah, I > guess it's supported. Personally, I see a world of difference. Leslie41: I might agree with you if Black and Potter weren't so preoccupied with Snape's unattractiveness, if they didn't make cruel comments about Snape's nose, his greasy face, his hair, etc. They relish in the fact that Snape is profoundly ugly. As much as they relish in the fact that they are beautiful. If you are expecting me to believe that this kind of behavior stops with Severus Snape, and Black and Potter are kind and generous souls with regard to every other greasy ugly teen that crosses their blessed path, I would say that you're probably someone who never went to high school. > Lanval: > And I tend to be very wary of this kind of exaggeration. There's so > much of it out in Fandom. Like those who firmly believe that the > Marauders gang-raped Snape on a regular basis... Leslie41: Ha! I think they'd probably all have committed suicide rather than do that! :^) > Lanval: > But I can't blame Sirius for his attitude towards Kreacher. It > wasn't smart, but it was understandable. One hardly needs to have > a "mean streak" to get crotchety with that particular elf. Leslie41: Agreed. But you did ask... From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Mon May 22 19:47:30 2006 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 19:47:30 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ Mold In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152686 > Randy" wrote: > Like Grimmauld Place is a grim old place? > foodiedb: > Being that there are two "m's" and it is pretty mold in there, I > took it as Grim mold place. What do you think? I'm not sure that we use 'mold' (or UK spelling 'mould') as an adjective in UK english. I would say 'It is quite mouldy' to describe something with a fluffy fungus, or I'd say 'Stilton cheese is supposed to contain mould - and it's yummy'. Bearing that in mind, I find 'Grim Old Place' to be a more likely pun, especially as auld is a lovely Scottish spelling of old, as the grammar just seems to fit better. Having said that though, I'm quite sure that there is absolutely no right or wrong way to interpret the name - it is all down to the images conjured by your mind when you read the books! I think it is a brilliant idea. JLV xx From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 22 20:02:44 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 20:02:44 -0000 Subject: When did DD become headmaster? (Was: Pince/Filch) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152687 > Carol responds: > I think we can determine the approximate date that Dumbledore became > headmaster based on two things: Lupin's enrollment in Hogwarts as a > first year, which would be in 1971 if I remember correctly, and > (possibly) McGonagall's tenure as Transfiguration teacher, which would > have begun when DD stopped teaching Transfiguration to become > headmaster. That would be "thirty years ago this December" as of OoP, > or December 1965 (which suggests a sudden replacement, as if someone > had just died). But we also need to consider the dates for the > Weasleys if Apollyon Pringle predates DD's tenure as headmaster. Potioncat: I'm working this from memory, so I expect others will fine tune these years. I know before HBP most of us (and the Lexicon) thought that DD became Headmaster shortly before Remus arrived at Hogwarts as a student. Lupin does "seem" to imply that. I think it was a mistake on our part. We also have to consider that when Tom Riddle came back to Hogwarts, DD was already the Headmaster. It was about 10 years after Riddle had applied for DADA with Dippet. I would put that at about 55/56. Not to argue with your dates, Carol---because I'm worse at this than JKR is---but the Lexicon has McGonagall as starting in 1956. Here's the link: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/main/timeline_1950-1970.html So it looks like to me, that Dippet died, DD was promoted to Headmaster and McGonagall was hired as Transfigurations and possibly also Head of Gryffindor. (I wonder who was Deputy Headmaster-- Slughorn?) Dippet doesn't have to have died at that point. I'm just assuming it. I think he follwed Phineas Nigellus, but there isn't really canon for it. According to the Black Family Tree, iirc, PN dies in the 1920s. That would put PN Black, Dippet and DD as contemporaries of a sort. > Carol: The only way I can reconcile those > apparently conflicting indicators of the Weasleys' age is to assume > that Hagrid didn't become gamekeeper until after Dumbledore became > headmaster. Potioncat: I don't see that Hagrid's being an assistant or apprentice to Ogg would be a problem. I think Hagrid says firmly that he stayed at Hogwarts after he was expelled. Although Harry is friends with Hagrid, it's not too likely that Molly or Arthur would have been friends with the gamekeeper. They may have known of Hagrid but had no reason to mention him. Also, they weren't in the original Order, and would not have developed a friendship with him after Hogwarts. Carol: We know that DD was there to admit > eleven-year-old Remus Lupin in that year. Did Ogg and Pringle > conveniently retire (or die) that same year? Did Dumbledore ease them > out and substitute protected people of his own choice, the half- giant > Hagrid and the Squib Filch, at the same time outlawing the old > punishments (including whipping, manacles, and possibly > Transfiguration)? Potioncat: In one of the memories, we hear Slughorn say that DD is adamant that Horcruxes not be taught. (I think it was horcruxes and not just Dark arts) At that time, DD would have been, at most, the Deputy Headmaster. So he had some influence at that point. At the same time, he wasn't able to prevent Hagrid's expulsion. I think we can assume that Dippet allowed the severe punishments. These punishments may have been considered very acceptable by the WW at large. We can decide or guess that JKR messed up her timeline with Filch; or we can decide that Filch worked for Pringle for a while. It's possilbe he never administered any of the punishments, but would have liked to, and is disappointed that he doesn't have the authority. Interestingly, when he did have the authority, he wasn't able to be decisive and do it. So he may be like a lot of on-lookers who sometimes say, "If that were my child, I would..." (Particulary on- lookers who haven't had children yet.) > Carol: > I absolutely agree that it was Dumbledore who abolished the old > punishments (and IMO started using Hogwarts as a refuge for people he > was trying to protect at about the same time). But when did that > happen, why protect Filch, and how did Filch gain his familiarity with > the "old ways" as practiced by Apollyon Pringle? Potioncat: As much as I'd like to think DD abolished the punishments on the first day of his new position, he might not have. While he can be very firm in what he tolerates, he can tolerate quite a bit. cough*Snape*cough. I mean...cough*ProfessorSnape*cough. And if the WW in general accepted those forms of discipline, he may have moved a bit slower. Keep in mind that Molly once hit a twin with her broom, and she makes the comments about the marks Arthur still has in a matter of fact manner. It's not like she's horrified by it. Look what Umbrage got away with, just because Harry upheld the schoolboy code and kept quiet. So I think---to get to the point--that it was 55 or 56 that DD became Headmaster. It seems that he was either Deputy or a very strong presence during Dippet's term. I'd love to know who his first Deputy was and whether McGonagall was immediately made HoH. I assume she was. Perhaps it wouldn't work that way in RL, but I suspect it did in this case. From megs0124 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 20:12:30 2006 From: megs0124 at yahoo.com (Megan) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 20:12:30 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152688 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com , "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > QUESTIONS > 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's > curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not ask > the librarian? Well, Harry does consult books.... Hermione! (ha!) Harry is a 15 year old boy/young man and most 15 year olds want to do the least bit of work to find out the answer to a question. When in the past has Harry (or Ron even) consulted a book on their own, even after Hermione's insistance and urdging. > > 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted > Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get > Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were > doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) > would've learned about UVs? They might have picked up on it through converstations of their parent/other adults. Young kids might "know" about things but not know the specifics of them. The Twins might not have known what the consequences of the Vow was or understood them. Youngsters don't have a complete understanding of things at times, especially dealing with such mature things. I doubt they had any understanding of what they were doing but thohgt, hey, lets try it! > > 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron & > Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon her & > Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron to F&G? Do > you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing in" to Ron's > love life from hers? Thats a good idea. What better way to get her brothers off her back than to bring their attention to their brother and his evolving love life. Ginny seems to have always had a good relationship with her brothers, sharing similar personalities and humor. > > 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the > kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about > others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? > I think they wanted to spare Molly's feelings. They love their Mother a lot and have seen first hand what Percy has done to her. They know Molly would be upset upon hearing them call Percy that and know Molly would yell at them, regardless of how deserved the name calling might be. The relationship between Percy and his family is (if not getting better) at least on speaking terms. They would not want to do anything to jeopardize this fragile relationship. > 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to > tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help Draco? > Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, relying > upon others more? > Harry is growing up and might be finally learning that if he would have just ASKED questions/told things to people in the past, things might have been better in some circumstances. He still has not learned to value the opinions of his peers/adults. Harry seems to have a "one-track" mind in regards to Snape/Draco and no matter how deserved or undeserved his opinions are, he never wants to take into account that he might be wrong about people. I think it is interesting that he almost pities Draco at one point in HPB, noticing that Draco had become pale and had circles under his eyes. Is Harry finally realizing the mask people wear to protect themselves/hid the truth from people? Harry takes everything it seems at face value and doesn't want to trust people who "seem" to be against him or DD or good. Think back to PoA and how he assumed (though he was right to) that Sirius was out to murder him and never thought that there was more to the story than what meets the eye. I would think Harry might begin to understand that things may not be what they seem. > 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape > is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get > information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's > that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's > statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these > years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is > the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the > fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When > is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry > correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? > I would say that yes, Snape is a horrible GOOD actor, yet sometimes he lets the truth "slip". Minor hesitations in speech (OoP), Shaking of the hands (HBP). Snape has also learned how to behave during his "off-time" from being a Death Eater. He was surrounded by good wizards and knew what was expected of someone. Many people in everyday society know how to act in public and play the face game in order to hide their true feelings. We won't know until the end of book 7 if Snape is a good actor or not. He has to be good IMO or he would not have survived so long. Snape has either decieved VM/DEs or DD/OP or both. I cannot help but still believe that Snape is a good guy deep down (and yes, he is sexy in a uber-intellegent but cannot handle contact with the unintellegent masses and am scarred for life- kind of way:-*). If he never did turn good initially and was a double/triple agent for old Voldy, then whats to say the years of being a good guy never got to him? If he IS a bad guy, I think some ounce of good might have seeped into his sallow skin and soul. > 7. Who do you think, in the past, has issued invitations to Hermione > for Christmas at the Burrow? Do you imagine Hermione invited > herself? Ron invited her? Mrs. Weasley? Ginny? Or that it was simply > assumed she'd go? What do you think happened this year? Was an > invitation given and declined? Was it all so awkward between Ron & > Hermione that she was not invited at all? > I don't think Mrs Weasly would have invited her and I cannot remember if she was invited. I assume (and always have) that she revieved an invitation (with Molly's Ok) to visit. Since I am at work and have no Canon with me, I cannot remember when the first time she visited was. Whenever she is there, she is always with Ron/Harry. Nothing is ever mentoned that she was invited my Ginny. > 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by > the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience > and/or are cruel? I DIED laughing when reading it. In a way it is cruel (and good ting Hermione was not there to see it or we'd have her after gnome rights too -if anyone can come up with a cute saying for the gnomes, please go for it- my brain is not working ATM). The gnome started it is my answer. It bit a twin and had to pay. Is it cruel....... yes but is it funny! How less cruel is it than when in COS (I think) Ron and Harry threw the gnomes out of their holes? How less cruel is being thrown through the air? > > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and > welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds > Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet > over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not > have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? > We only see the situation through Harry-Vision. Fleur has been at the Weasley's for a bit before Harry gets there and he is a first- hand witness to her attitude of "betterness" when she brings him breakfast. She comments on the lack of things to do (I think) except cooking and cleaning. To Molly, those are important things to do. I assume Fleur has never had to do these things and she takes for granted that some people enjoy and are happy with "the simple life". I assume the Celestina Warbeck evening is a yearly tradition (or almost). It is MOLLY'S house, not Fleur and it was rude of her to keep taking and making fun of HER HOSTS entertainment schedule. Molly, by turning up the wireless, was hinting to Fleur to SHUT UP! Fleur is just unconcious that her attitude might offend some people. She is out of her element and is dealing with it the only way she knows how. > 10. The scene with Harry, Arthur & Lupin is one which, when we look > back upon it, is clearly setting us up for the tower scene. It is > filled with the kinds of remarks and statements which feel > like "great pronouncements" or "truths" or "key insights," such > as "It comes down to whether you trust DD's judgment" and "But > Dumbledore can make mistakes" and "You are determined to hate him, > Harry" and "Has it occurred to you, Harry, that Snape was simply > pretending??" Play those lines off one another, and you pretty much > have the DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape camps after the tower scene, no? > (As well as the "DD could NEVER have been that wrong about Snape" > vs. "DD can make BIG mistakes" camps.) Comments? Additionally, > Lupin makes some remarks here about Snape which surprised some fans. > Was he speaking what he truly believed? Did you believe him? > There are people I have or had in my life that I too neither hate nor like. It is after having a rocky and sometimes hateful past with that person and me personally coming to deal with the events surrounding my relationship (or lack thereof) with that person. Lupin is the same way. He has grown up and though he knows he and Snape will never be friends, they are no longer enemies. After a while, the feelings of dislike soften but the memories are still there and affection (of semi-like) will never be there. Like I said above, we won't know until the end og book 7 if Snape is truely a murderer or a fake murderer. DD can make mistakes. I think he admitted it at the end of OotP that he overlooked the extreme dislike between Sirius and Snape. He made a Old-Man's folly then and maybe he did in believing in Snape. Rowling has often gave us clues that we think mean one thing but is something completely different. DO I believe Snape is the Big Bad Murder from on top of the Tower? I have mixed feelings but I cannot (or dont want to) believe that DD would be so decieved by a person. > 11. It is clear, to Lupin anyway, that Harry is *hoping* that the > HBP is his father. This is reinforced by the fact that Harry is > disappointed when he checks the book's date and sees it's too old to > have been his dad's era. Harry has also previously stated that the > HBP is a better potions teacher than Snape. Why does Harry like the > HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? And what > does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has something changed in > Snape, to have made him truly a lesser teacher now than then? Or is > it simply the removal, for Harry, of Snape the person and their > unpleasant history from the mix, so that he's seeing "pure teaching" > in the book and not the personality of the teacher? Harry want some sort of connection between him and his father other than the cloak. He hears all the time about the similarities between his and his mother Lily's eyes and rarely anything about James. It is every child's wish to have their parents teach them (whether it is a sport or a craft or even help with homwork) and Harry has never had this. Harry has never given Snape a chance to teach him or even realize what Snape has taught him. There are teachers in my past I hated at the time and did not believe I could ever learn anything from them. It is not until I have grown up and re-evaluated the situation and actually thought about it that I learned I DID learning something, things I have not forgotten until this day. I don't think Harry will realize until he is older what Snape did teach him. Sometimes we are taught in such unseen ways by people that we never truely realize them. Until Harry lets go of his Hate for Snape (which is not likely going to happen if he is DDM :-( )he will never see how much he has learned. > > 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? VM might give them the "acceptance" that they want and allow them to Muggle-Hunt freely. Warewolves are looked down upon and rejected and VM is offering them everything they want- Equality. Would VM actually do this if he succeded in the war? I have a feeling not. They are not pure bloods. They are of "mixed" race, something that is Bad in VMs eyes. He is most likely pretending to be friends in order to get what he wants, POWER, then use them as pawns to keep his power. They are nothing more to him than a TOOL, just like the Giants. > > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't > stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why > or why not? > She is believing what she wants to believe. She has been hoping that Percy has not abandoned his family and been as big as a prat that he has been. She has and is deluding herself to believe that the Weseleys can be a big happy family again. She has not come to terms with the fact that he is not like the rest of them. He is like the cousin who is an accountant. She might have been putting on a face for him. I can imagine her crying to Arthur that night about what did we do wrong as parents and asking him if he is ever coming home. As long as she has hope that he is not as bad or dissapointing as we thing, there is hope. > > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good > but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his > behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? > I believe he is a combination of all these things. He is a smart, intellegent and ambitious young man and wants to show people that he is not like his family and that he can succede in the Ministry, something he sees he father as not. He has never truely fit in with his family and sees the MoM as a psudo-family, one that accepts him (seemingly) for who he is. IMO, he is only a tool for the MoM. They are using his thirst for acceptance and thirst to succede. I believe (and I cannot believe they have not done so yet) that the MoM will make him a scapegoat for something. > 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and then > knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is determined not to > give it to him. We see a Harry who I would argue is self- possessed, > confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in sticking up for what he > believes is right. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or > was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What > did you think of Harry in this scene? > Harry has grown up. After all he has been through and seeing that the series is drawing to a close, he has to grow up. After all Harry has been through, I would be dissapointed if he did not feel/say what he did. I have been waiting for him to accept his lot in life and come to terms with what life has thrown at him. I have been waiting for time to do this for a long time now. Now, with no adule "mentor" to guide him, he would be forced in accepting his lot anyway. He is almost an adult and it would be expected that he act the part. Now, if he can truely handle this responsibility and rise to the occasion is a different question indeed. I believe he may struggle at first but in the end succede. Acceptance is the first step. Action comes next. > 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if > you like. > I like the old Fudge, not the Fudge from the end of GOF. I admire Scrimgeour's need for results but detest his ability to allow innocent people to suffer in order for him to look good. I wish we would have seen more of him as head of the Auror Department. In truth, I don't really like either but who likes politicians? JK! Both have tier strengths and weaknesses but in truth, neither is what the WW truely needs. The MoM needs a mix of the two. A man of feeling and one of action. We do not know much about Scrimgeour's reign as Minister except that he has allowed innocents to go to jail and want Harry as a Poster boy. Maybe he will surprise us but I doubt it. I think eventually his will see his faults. He too, Like Fudge, is full of.... Fudge and that is their downfall- Hubris- excessive pride. Hopefully Scrimgeour will come to realize his faults before it is too late and harry (this time) has to save the day. Has anyone looked to see the etemology of Scrimgeour's name? JW. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 22 20:27:02 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 20:27:02 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ Mold In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152689 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jlv230" wrote: > > > Randy" wrote: > > Like Grimmauld Place is a grim old place? > > > foodiedb: > > Being that there are two "m's" and it is pretty mold in there, I > > took it as Grim mold place. What do you think? > JLV: > I'm not sure that we use 'mold' (or UK spelling 'mould') as an > adjective in UK english. I would say 'It is quite mouldy' to > describe something with a fluffy fungus, or I'd say 'Stilton cheese > is supposed to contain mould - and it's yummy'. > > Bearing that in mind, I find 'Grim Old Place' to be a more likely > pun, especially as auld is a lovely Scottish spelling of old, as the > grammar just seems to fit better. Having said that though, I'm quite > sure that there is absolutely no right or wrong way to interpret the > name - it is all down to the images conjured by your mind when you > read the books! I think it is a brilliant idea. Geoff: At the risk of being boring, I have on more than one occasion commented that "auld" is a Scots dialect word for "old" and since JKR has lived in Edinburgh for some years, I think she is also aware of the fact that the city of Edinburgh famously has the nickname of "Auld Reekie". You are quite right that "mould" is a noun - and even with the UK spelling of "mouldy", I wouldn't use a structure like "grim mouldy place". Grim AND mouldy perhaps. From meriaugust at yahoo.com Mon May 22 20:36:28 2006 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 20:36:28 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152690 Snipping of the excellent summation - > QUESTIONS > 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's > curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not ask > the librarian? Meri - Because that's what Hermione's for ;-) > 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the > kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about > others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? Meri - All the Weasleys know that the topic of Percy is a tender one for Molly and Arthur and with all that is going on, all the stress everyone's under, and compounded with the fact that Percy still hasn't come around and made nice, Fred is probably keeping his feelings to himself to avoind the Wrath of Molly. > 7. Who do you think, in the past, has issued invitations to Hermione > for Christmas at the Burrow? Do you imagine Hermione invited > herself? Ron invited her? Mrs. Weasley? Ginny? Or that it was simply > assumed she'd go? What do you think happened this year? Was an > invitation given and declined? Was it all so awkward between Ron & > Hermione that she was not invited at all? Meri - Hermione has, IIRC, never spent Christmastime at the Burrow before (neither had Harry before this, come to that). I had always assumed that either Ron or Ginny had extended the invite (or perhaps Mrs. Weasley, who might look at her as a surrogate child to some extent, though not nearly as much as she does for Harry). This year I would imagine that it would be a little awkward at the Burrow with all the Hr/R tension, and besides Hermione spent almost all of last summer there; she hasn't spent any significant time with her mother and father in a long time, so she probably could use a little decompression time with her family before jumping back in to all the WW stuff she's got to deal with. > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and > welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds > Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet > over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not > have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? Meri - Well, this sort of thing happens, doesn't it? It takes some time to get used to potential new family members. RW example: my sister recently met my cousin's new girlfriend and after only a brief meeting had already decided that she "didn't like her". And it can be especially difficult from Molly's perspective (seeing her oldest son marry) and from Ginny's perspective (the youngest sister seeing her oldest and most respected brother marry). They have, admittedly, not been the friendliest, but then again Fleur hasn't been either. She is extremely critical of the Burrow, the food, the weather. This is Fleur's personality but she should at least be making an effort to ingratiate herself to her new family, especially by accepting and putting up with some of the family's more annoying Christmas traditions (in my family it was wearing the Santa hat when opening presents). What I really want to know, however, is where Bill is on all this? How does he feel about his fiancee and his mother and sister being at odds? We don't see much of Bill at all in this book (except for his brave fighting at the end). > > 11. It is clear, to Lupin anyway, that Harry is *hoping* that the > HBP is his father. This is reinforced by the fact that Harry is > disappointed when he checks the book's date and sees it's too old to > have been his dad's era. Harry has also previously stated that the > HBP is a better potions teacher than Snape. Why does Harry like the > HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? And what > does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has something changed in > Snape, to have made him truly a lesser teacher now than then? Or is > it simply the removal, for Harry, of Snape the person and their > unpleasant history from the mix, so that he's seeing "pure teaching" > in the book and not the personality of the teacher? Meri - I don't think Harry necessarily wants the HBP to be his father; I just think that Harry is still so desperate for some connection to his father that he'll see it anywhere he can, and getting mysterious lessons from his disembodied father is a little more attractive than getting them from a random stranger. And I think this really does show that Snape can be a good teacher if he approaches it the right way. Harry is in fact learning from Snape (oh, irony of ironies), something that has proved nearly impossible for the previous five years. And this is, along with the Pensieve memories, probably the beginning of Harry's path to understanding of Snape. > 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? Meri - They might not, but then again it can't get much worse for them than it is under Ministry rule. They are unemployable and are shunned from civilized communites because of fear and prejudice. As long as careful precautions (wolfsbane potion and isolation during the full moon) are taken there is no reason why a werewolf might not live a relatively normal life, but that is not possible as long as anti-werewolf legislation exists. With LV, however, they could be as they are and for the more violent werewolves (Greyback for instance) who have no desire to acclimate themselves into regular society this is a tempting offer. Why should LV care how many werewolves there are? And should they ever get out of hand (after they've served and done his bidding) he can just kill them off. Maybe this will be part of LV's plan in book 7 and we'll get to figure out how this is done in the HP-verse. (Just a random question: how well does Remus Lupin fit in to the werewolf underground? He's spent his adult life trying to fit in to regular society, how can they possibly trust him?) > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't > stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why > or why not? Meri - Not at all surprised. She's desperate to see him, to have her family whole again. If Scrimgeour had said that Percy was coming to the Burrow to hunt down a herd of Crumple Horned Snorkacks she probably would have bought it. > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good > but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his > behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? Meri - I can sympathize with Percy a little. He, like Ron, was overshadowed by his older brothers (Prefects and Head Boy and Quidditch Captain) but was never cool like them and so he never really earned the respect of his younger siblings or the companionship of the older two. He probably felt trapped by his overwhelming family and was looking for a way out, saw one, took it and now that he's been proven wrong is finding it hard to take it back. I think he's on the side of good, and I think he'll wise up before biting the dust in book 7. > 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and then > knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is determined not to > give it to him. We see a Harry who I would argue is self- possessed, > confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in sticking up for what he > believes is right. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or > was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What > did you think of Harry in this scene? Meri - Loved him! He's got a little of Professor McGonagall in him, doesn't he? This scene really reminded me of the Minerva/Delores scenes from book 5. > 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if > you like. Meri - Compared to Fudge Srimgeour is the "Decider" and he's making decisions, alright. But his desire to be seen doing something has nothing to do with doing the right thing, and he's again ignoring DD's words of wisdome from Cedric's eulogy: there is a difference between doing what is right and what is easy and Scrimgeour is still doing what is easy. It is easy to arrest people without evidence and try and get the Boy Who Lived/the Chosen One to be the MoM spokeswizard, but it would be much harder to actually attempt to track down real death eaters and to tell the WW that things aren't going so well. Well done, SSSusan! Meri From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 21:04:19 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:04:19 -0000 Subject: Draco, Harry & Norbert / Keeping Lupin's Secret (was:My own take on the Prank) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152691 > >>Joe: > > > > In fact we see the scene again in some ways when Draco follows > > Harry, Ron and Hermione to Hagrid's hut just so he can tell > > McGonagall. > >>Lunasa: > I was thinking that myself actually. And everyone one involved got > punished. All four kids got points taken away for snooping about > the grounds in the middle of the night. > > >>Magpie: > I agree Draco in PS/SS (where he's spying on the Trio etc.) does > remind me of what we hear of Snape from Sirius and with the > Prank. > It certainly sounds like he was trying to get them in trouble. > Though that also brings up a whole host of other things to think > about for me, because I don't think Draco does follow them just so > he can tell McGonagall. He only tells McGonagall when he gets > caught himself. Draco throughout PS/SS, to me, seems to want far > more to be in on it than he does to be telling on it. > Betsy Hp: Actually, this scene in PS/SS was where I expected Draco and Harry to become friends. (I was expecting such a scene throughout the entire book because the "school days" genre feel was so strong in PS/SS. Oh well. ) To refresh everyone's memory, Draco first overhears about Hagrid hatching a dragon from Harry and Hermione [SS paperback p.234], but doesn't say a word to anyone. He then sneaks down to Hagrid's hut and sees the newborn Norbert for himself [235] and again tells no one. When the trio hit on giving Norbert to Charlie, Draco finds out about the plan [238] and keeps silent. Harry and Hermione go ahead with the plan (Ron being too injured to help) since it's too late to change the meeting time with Charlie. And then comes one of the funnier scenes in the books, IMO. "Then a sudden movement ahead of them made them almost drop the crate. Forgetting that they were already invisible, they shrank into the shadows, staring at the dark outlines of two people grappling with each other ten feet away. A lamp flared. "Professor McGonagall, in a tarten bathrobe and a hair net had Malfoy by the ear." [240] The *reason* I find that scene so very amusing is that apparently Draco *didn't* call McGonagall there to catch Harry in the act; Draco was waiting to do the catching himself. But when he leaped out at the person walking by in the dark, he actually grabbed hold of McGonagall. Hee! That *must* have been a surprise. Honestly, the fact that Draco didn't share the information about the dragon with *anyone*, and that he was lurking in the hallway all by himself (no Crabbe or Goyle) suggested to me that his real goal was to see an actual, live dragon. They're his namesake, after all. Unfortunately, McGonagall ruined his plans and he ended up being sent into a "werewolf infested" forest. But this is very different, IMO, from Snape's interaction with the Marauders. For one, it's not Draco's style to try and catch wrong doers in the act himself. If he'd wanted Harry to get in trouble he'd have told Filch the where and the when and let Filch do the catching. Or he could have put a bug in Filch's ear back when Norbert hatched. But that follows for me, since I see no parallels between young! Snape and Draco, or between the trio and the Marauders. Other than their houses, the two generations aren't all that similar. (Honestly, the closest parallel I see is young!Snape to Harry, and young!James to Draco, but even that isn't a perfect match by any means.) > >>Magpie: > > What's actually a bit funny that I just thought of is that, you > know, what about Dumbledore getting in trouble? Little Snape > could have caused a whole lot of trouble back then, similar to the > way his telling on Lupin in PoA gets him fired. Dumbledore's > snuck a werewolf into the school? One who, it might come out, has > in fact been roaming the countryside with three other students > every full moon? However did Dumbledore get Snape to keep the > secret? Especially in a way that MWPP never seemed to appreciate? Betsy Hp: *That* is an interesting question, Magpie. I'm trying very hard to not enter into conjecture about what exactly happened during the infamous Prank. JKR is far too good at twisting preconceived notions (see Merope and Tom), and I'm sure there will be some twists to this particular tale. Because *if* Snape was really Lucius Malfoy's lapdog, he had an excellent way of getting that rather hot piece of information out to the WW general public. And the WW would not have stood for their precious children being exposed to a werewolf. Even if Dumbledore (with his powerful connections) hadn't been fired, Lupin would have been expelled for sure. And I'm betting Dumbledore would have at least been weakened. It didn't take very much for the MoM (under Fudge's rather weak and ineffective leadership) to take over Hogwarts. Yet, it's only when Lupin shows himself incapable of being safe around children that Snape finally outs him. Why does Snape keep the secret for so very, very long? Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 21:39:17 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 21:39:17 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152692 Alla: > > If you can show me that Snape never killed, tortured , poisoned people while being in Voldemort's employ, I will absolutely say that he is not responsible for the acts of other DE, just for his own, but I think he has plenty of blood on his hands, NOT just by association. > > Ceridwen: > I have the iron heating up, right beside the oven door. This will be my fourth post. > > We are beginning to have some canon for Snape 'slithering out of > things' with the DEs. In 'Spinner's End', Bellatrix says, twice that I can find off-hand: > Bellatrix may be indulging in some hyperbole, but she has the idea > that Snape gets out of things. How often he really does, how often > he was absent while the other DEs ran dangers, we don't know. It > could just be a matter of degree, or times in the thick of things, > which Bellatrix's anger converts to 'the usual'. There must be some > basis in truth, even if she's going over the top. > Carol responds: Will a curling iron do? How about old-fashioned electric rollers with a hot center? I don't own an iron. (You know, permanent press clothes and all that?) But, to forge ahead, risking burned fingers along with Ceridwen for a fourth post . . . . The thing is, Alla, you know that we can't show you what Snape didn't do. It's simply not possible to do that. But it's also impossible to show at this point what he did do (with a few small exceptions) and any judgment that he has murdered or tortured others simply because he was a DE must be based on assumption. Certainly he is a very different person from, say, a mad fanatic like Barty Jr. or a simple thug like Amycus. Nor does he have anything in common with a filthy ravening brute like Fenrir Greyback. DEs, we are learning, do not all fit in the same mold. "Spinner's End" provides our only glimpse of Snape outside Hogwarts, and it provides little no evidence that he has himself performed any Unforgiveable Curses or other violent crimes. (I've already talked about the Emmeline Vance claim as merely an implication that his information helped to lead to her capture and death; there are reasons to suspect the veracity of this claim, as I have noted elsewhere.) In addition to Bella's distrust of Snape, which certainly must have some basis (just as Dumbledore's trust in him must have some as yet unrevealed basis), and her accusations that he "slithers out of action," claiming to do so on the Dark Lord's orders, we have her list of things he didn't do: He wasn't with the Dark Lord when he fell, he never made any attempt to find LV when he vanished, he didn't return at once when LV was reborn, he wasn't at the MoM battling for the Prophecy, and he hasn't murdered Harry Potter after having him at his mercy for five years. The one thing that he *had* done that she knows of is thwart Quirrell's attempt to steal the Sorceror's Stone, not exactly aiding her lord and master. (Fortunately for Snape, she doesn't know that he sent the Order of the Phoenix to the MoM and that he saved Dumbledore's life after he was desperately injured by the ring Horcrux curse. He'd have had a harder time explaining those two actions, I think, especially the last.) What *has* he done, then? Well, he joined the Death Eaters when he was perhaps eighteen and he reported overhearing part of the Prophecy to the Dark Lord at a time when it was impossible to know who it referred to. (I have a hunch that the Prophecy was overheard on October 31, Harry's approximate conception date, but I won't argue for it here.) Um, what else? Oh, yes. He applied for the DADA position on LV's orders, ostensibly to spy on Dumbledore, but since he was already spying for Dumbledore "at great personal risk," all that amounts to is being a double agent, which he assuredly is--but, Draco to the contrary, that does not make him Voldemort's man. In "Spinner's End," he agreed to take a UV to protect and watch over Draco--hardly what LV wanted him to do if one of his goals was for Draco to fail in the attempt. And he accepted, for whatever reason, that last last provision of the vow, apparently against his will, with terrible consequences for himself as well as Dumbledore. (Surely ESE!Snape would have refused to take the UV in the first place and acted like the "brutal-faced DE" once he was on the tower.) Yes, he killed Dumbledore, but he also got Draco and Harry off the tower and the DEs out of Hogwarts, stopping one from Crucioing Harry in the process. None of this has any bearing on what he may or may not have done as a DE before Godric's Hollow except that he was pretty clearly at Hogwarts when LV was vaporized. Even Karkaroff's testimony in GoF is unhelpful. He charges particular DEs with particular crimes--not nearly as many as we might have thought except in the case of the Imperius specialist Mulciber, who evidently used his favorite UC on "countless" people. Others are also identified with the use of a particular curse (Cruciatus) or a particular murder or with spying and providing LV with MoM secrets. Snape's name does not come up in connection with any of these crimes. Karkaroff's testimony gives every evidence of specialization on the part of the higher-ranked DEs, of whom young Snape was evidently one. We don't know what he did, but had he been involved in any of the crimes Karkaroff lists, Karkaroff would surely have said so. Instead, we get only, "I assure you, Severus Snape is a Death Eater," a charge of which the MoM has already cleared him thanks to DD's testimony. JKR has had numerous opportunities to tell us what Snape did as a DE, but aside from the eavesdropping incident, she has told us nothing. We know only what others say he didn't do or fail to say that he did do. Annoying and frustrating for people on both sides of the question, but not at all enlightening. Until we have evidence that he personally killed, tortured, or Imperio'd anyone, we simply cannot take for granted that he did so. Guilt by association? Yes. But if he's DDM, he has been trying to pay for his own past sins, particularly the revelation of the partial prophecy to LV, for about fifteen years. Of course you're free to *think* that he has blood on his hands other than the death of Dumbledore, but at this point, that view remains an assumption with no canon evidence behind it. (We can't judge Snape by, say, Amycus and Alecto any more than we can judge Harry by McLaggen.) What we *do* have evidence for in HBP is Snape's heretofore unsuspected gifts as a Healer. Maybe, just maybe, Harry isn't the only one with a "saving people thing." That's the Snape angle I hope to see more of in Book 7. Carol, wishing that JKR would write an eighth book, "The Autobiography of Severus Snape" From logistis_20 at yahoo.gr Mon May 22 03:31:48 2006 From: logistis_20 at yahoo.gr (george_19.5 george) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 04:31:48 +0100 (BST) Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060522033148.28459.qmail@web27315.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152693 logistis_20 wrote: > > Why he should die like that? And why LV he want so badly to kill DD? Najwa now: >> As for why LV wanted him dead, it's because LV knows that DD is the reason that everything stays together and he keeps getting beaten. LV is afraid of DD, and knows with him around it will be next to impossible to get Harry. << I believe that he must learn what happen with the horcrux; that why he killed him? George (logistis_20) From emelye_miller at yahoo.com Mon May 22 13:45:05 2006 From: emelye_miller at yahoo.com (Emelye Miller) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 06:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Durmstrang In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060522134505.52672.qmail@web38507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152694 Bruce Alan Wilson wrote: >> "Strang und Durm" means in German 'storm and strife' and refers to a late 18th/early 19th C. movement in literature, art, and drama (and, to a lesser extent music) the dwelled on strong, towering emotions. << Not to be a pain, but actually it's Sturm und Drang. JK changed it up a little. The def is right, though. Emelye From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 20:10:06 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 20:10:06 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152695 > Leslie41: > Oh, I don't think Snape is innocent by any means. My > point is that people seem very willing to indict Snape for his > behaviors (or even *invent* nasty things he's done), when other > characters do things that are just as, or far more blameworthy. > But (IMHO) because those other characters are charismatic, or > handsome, or well-liked, they don't seem to have to bear the > responsibility or the blame for their actions the way Snape does. > They're given a "pass". Not fair. Just not fair. Oh, absolutely other people get passes for things where Snape does not. Hagrid gets a pass for being a bad teacher. Snape does not. That's one example. And it is perfectly appropriate that it be that way. Hagrid is nice, Snape is mean. Hagrid therefore gets a pass and Snape does not. There are rewards for being nice. Getting passes for your faults is one of them. There are problems with being mean (leaving aside abusive, which Snape is). The problem is you don't get the same pass for your faults that a nice person does. And all that is perfectly fair and perfectly appropriate. It's part of the great balancing wheel of life -- or karma, if you prefer to use a much more loaded term. Lupinlore From mjf152 at yahoo.co.uk Mon May 22 21:41:24 2006 From: mjf152 at yahoo.co.uk (Maureen) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 22:41:24 +0100 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas -- rude Fleur, Celestina's lyrics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44723004.9080204@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 152696 cubfanbudwoman wrote: Celestina sings: "Oh, come and stir my cauldron, And if you do it right, I'll boil you up some hot strong love To keep you warm tonight." Mo: Her rudeness, to me, doesn't just reflect on her attitude to the music, but how she feels about the way the Weasleys live. Potioncat: It reminds me of rap lyrics, and if it was my kids listening to it, I'd want to turn it off too! Mo: Funny how we all see it differently! To me the lyrics remind me of songs like Fever, and Mad About The Boy. Sultry, soft jazz type music, I guess. I can see someone of Molly's age enjoying it, while someone of Fleur's age would take the mickey. From lisa_croke at yahoo.com.au Mon May 22 22:26:35 2006 From: lisa_croke at yahoo.com.au (Lisa Croke) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 22:26:35 -0000 Subject: Punishment for the trio (was Re: My own take on the Prank) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152697 > Joe Goodwin wrote: > > In fact we see the scene again in some ways when Draco follows > > Harry, Ron and Hermione to Hagrid's hut just so he can tell > > McGonagall. > > Lunasa: > I was thinking that myself actually. And everyone one involved got > punished. All four kids got points taken away for snooping about > the grounds in the middle of the night. Or was it detention? >From memory, it was both of those. They got 50 points EACH taken away, AND a detention which they did with Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest. At least that's what my fading memory is telling me. aussiehpnut From leslie41 at yahoo.com Mon May 22 23:18:50 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 23:18:50 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152698 > > Leslie41: > > Oh, I don't think Snape is innocent by any means. My > > point is that people seem very willing to indict Snape for his > > behaviors (or even *invent* nasty things he's done), when other > > characters do things that are just as, or far more blameworthy. > > But (IMHO) because those other characters are charismatic, or > > handsome, or well-liked, they don't seem to have to bear the > > responsibility or the blame for their actions the way Snape does. > > They're given a "pass". Not fair. Just not fair. > > > Lupinlore: > Oh, absolutely other people get passes for things where Snape does > not. Hagrid gets a pass for being a bad teacher. Snape does not. > That's one example. And it is perfectly appropriate that it be > that way. Hagrid is nice, Snape is mean. Hagrid therefore gets > a pass and Snape does not. Leslie41: Okay. Hagrid, an incompetent teacher who nearly kills his students by willfully overexposing them to dangerous animals (whose danger he underestimates because of his bias towards them), gets a pass because Hagrid is "nice". In CoS he throws Harry and Ron in harms way by encouraging them to go into the spider-ridden forest. Those spiders would never do anything nasty to any of his students, would they? 'Course not. Sweet Hagrid. Nice Hagrid. Yes, let's give him a "pass". Just keep him far, far away from me, and my child. Snape, on the other hand, very effectively imparts enormous amounts of wisdom and life-saving knowledge to his students, most especially Harry (Carol's excellent post on the bezoar addresses this). But gee, he's not very "nice" about it, is he? In fact he's downright NOT nice. So, no "pass" for Snape. > Lupinlore: > There are rewards for being nice. Getting passes for your faults > is one of them. There are problems with being mean (leaving aside > abusive, which Snape is). The problem is you don't get the same > pass for your faults that a nice person does. Leslie41: Give me a competent and wise and mean over incompetent and stupid and nice any day. > Lupinlore: > And all that is perfectly fair and perfectly appropriate. Leslie41: Nope. Not fair. And highly inappropriate. And dangerous. And stupid. And a whole lot of other things. From juli17 at aol.com Mon May 22 23:29:37 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 19:29:37 EDT Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas Message-ID: <45c.12cbf53.31a3a361@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152699 QUESTIONS 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not ask the librarian? It surprises me that Harry doesn't look a *few* things up, but he never has, so I guess he's just not a book person. He prefers to find his answers other ways. And Hermione's always right there to get the book answers anyway, whether he asks for them or not! 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) would've learned about UVs? I assume the twins overheard the term and used it, likely without really understanding its true consequences (as they were only 7). Also due to their age, I feel pretty certain neither Molly or Arthur taught them the term, even with a warning never to use it (which would be rather like a parent saying "There's a loaded gun in the top of my closet, but you are not allowed to play with it" to a 7 year old!) 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? It was probably a little of both, sparing her feelings and avoiding the inevitable furious defense of Percy. He knows Molly is a mother first when it comes to Percy (or any of her children), after all. 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help Draco? Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, relying upon others more? I do think it signals a change, and it's a good step in the right direction for Harry. I hope we see more of it in Book 7. 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? I think Snape is good at hiding his feelings, as evidenced by his frequent "unreadable" and "inscrutable" looks. Whether he's as good at projecting false feelings is another matter, though I don't think he is. It seems when Snape allows himself to show any feelings (or loses his ability to control his emotions when he's in a temper) those feelings are indeed genuine. Now whether Harry is (or we are) *interpreting* the feelings correctly is the big question to me. The hatred and disgust on Snape's face when he kills Dumbledore, for instance, might be directed at Dumbledore, at himself, or at the task he is being forced to perform. It's not Snape's feelings I have difficulty discerning, it's his motivations, and that may also be where Harry is having problems. 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience and/or are cruel? Gnomes are pests, but so are rats, and I certainly wouldn't petrify a rat, paint it, plop a Santa hat on it and put it on top of my tree! Yuck! I mean, why would anyone want to look at a petrified gnome anyway? What were Molly and Arthur thinking? One feels worried for any deer that might wander past the Burrow--will they be petrified and tied to a lit-up sleigh in the front yard? And is there an SPCA in the WW? Er, probably not, but back to the original point... As for cruelty, the WW seems to accept a certain level of cruelty without censure. Perhaps it's inevitable when wizard kids can take out their frustrations on each other with a variety of hexes and spells. But I still wish Molly or Arthur had insisted the twins release the gnome and just put a star or something on top of their tree! 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? I find Molly and Fleur equally responsible. Molly should have tried harder to discover Fleur's likes and dislikes and include her in the Christmas activities, but Fleur should be adult enough to display at least a bare minimum of good manners! 10. The scene with Harry, Arthur & Lupin is one which, when we look back upon it, is clearly setting us up for the tower scene. It is filled with the kinds of remarks and statements which feel like "great pronouncements" or "truths" or "key insights," such as "It comes down to whether you trust DD's judgment" and "But Dumbledore can make mistakes" and "You are determined to hate him, Harry" and "Has it occurred to you, Harry, that Snape was simply pretending??" Play those lines off one another, and you pretty much have the DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape camps after the tower scene, no? (As well as the "DD could NEVER have been that wrong about Snape" vs. "DD can make BIG mistakes" camps.) Comments? Additionally, Lupin makes some remarks here about Snape which surprised some fans. Was he speaking what he truly believed? Did you believe him? I'm probably in the minority, but I think Lupin *was* speaking what he believed. Lupin is a very tolerant person, and perhaps because of his own "problem" he is willing to accept others' weaknesses. He considered Sirius a dear friend though Sirius often didn't hold up his side of the friendship, because he understood Sirius's impetuous nature and his arrested development due to his years of confinement in Azkaban. And while Lupin certainly doesn't consider Severus a friend, he understands what Snape went through as an outcast in school, enough so that he has developed no real hatred of Snape. Add to that the wolfsbane and Lupin's belief that Snape is working for the Order at great risk (whether this turns out to be true or not), even Snape revealing Lupin's secret isn't enough to make Lupin truly dislike him (especially as Lupin no doubt assigns himself as much or more blame for being outed after the Shrieking Shack incident). 11. It is clear, to Lupin anyway, that Harry is *hoping* that the HBP is his father. This is reinforced by the fact that Harry is disappointed when he checks the book's date and sees it's too old to have been his dad's era. Harry has also previously stated that the HBP is a better potions teacher than Snape. Why does Harry like the HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? And what does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has something changed in Snape, to have made him truly a lesser teacher now than then? Or is it simply the removal, for Harry, of Snape the person and their unpleasant history from the mix, so that he's seeing "pure teaching" in the book and not the personality of the teacher? I'm not sure it's really the "pure teaching" of the book, since Harry assigns a personality to the HBP, based on what he's reading. Certainly the teenaged HBP is a very different person from the adult Snape. I do think there is too much animosity between Snape and Harry for much knowledge to pass from one to the other. But I also think those parts of the HBP that Harry identifies with may be what will allow Harry and adult Snape to eventually come to a detente of sorts (assuming DDM!Snape). Snape may no longer be the HBP, but the HBP *is* part of him, a part Harry can understand, perhaps even like. It's a connection between them that's been established, and it will be interesting to see where it leads. 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? They'd be free to attack and feed without impunity. Or at least that's what they think, though anyone who believes Voldemort's promises is going to be unpleasantly surprised, I think (or would be, if he were to win the war, which of course he won't ;-). 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why or why not? No, because as someone else said, parents need to believe the best of their children. Until and if Molly is presented evidence she can't ignore, she will continue to believe the best of Percy. 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? I think he started out an ambitious prat, who is too proud to admit that he may have been misguided, but who, when pushed into a corner, will do the right thing in the end, likely at the cost of his life. 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and then knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is determined not to give it to him. We see a Harry who I would argue is self-possessed, confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in sticking up for what he believes is right. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What did you think of Harry in this scene? I agree that Harry showed a great deal of growth, and for the first time we saw a hint of how strong a person he will be as an adult. No one is going to push him around! Hey, maybe Lupin should take notes! 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if you like. I haven't fully made up my mind about Scrimgeour. In HBP he's not much better than Fudge, but it remains to be seen how he will react when the war reaches a point where he has to make a definitive choice between Voldemort and the Order. I think he may actually stick with the Order. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 23 00:12:43 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 20:12:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Punishment for the trio (was Re: My own take on the Prank) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060523001243.8287.qmail@web37212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152700 > Lunasa: > I was thinking that myself actually. And everyone one involved got > punished. All four kids got points taken away for snooping about > the grounds in the middle of the night. Or was it detention? Auusiehpnut: >From memory, it was both of those. They got 50 points EACH taken away, AND a detention which they did with Hagrid in the Forbidden Forest. At least that's what my fading memory is telling me. Catherine now: Actually, Draco doesn't get any points taken away from Slytherin. Harry, Hermione and poor Neville who got caught tyring to warn Harry and Hermione about Draco each get 50 points taken away from Gryffindor. It kind of makes Dumbledore's end of year points giving seem a little less drastic. Had McGonagall not taken 150 points away that night, Slytherin and Gryffindor would have been tied. In my opinion, DD just made it right again, Harry and Hermione were in fact, just trying to help Hagrid. Catherine Wondering what to do this summer? Go to Patronus 2006 (http://www.patronus.dk/2006) or, if you're already registered for Lumos (http://www.hp2006.org), meet up with other HPfGU members there! 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 SPONSORED LINKS Harry potter half-blood prince Half-blood prince Harry potter Harry potter birthday party Harry potter collectible Harry potter hat --------------------------------- 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. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail --------------------------------- Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From estesrandy at yahoo.com Tue May 23 00:20:24 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 00:20:24 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152701 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter > 16: A Very Frosty Christmas > GIANT SNIP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't > stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why > or why not? > > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good > but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his > behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? > ANother SNIP . > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, I wonder if Percy will be saved by Harry in Book Seven from a life separated from his family. Or maybe Molly this time. Harry has saved a Weasley in almost every book. COS ...Ginny HBP ...Ron OOP ...Arthur GOF ...The Twins (if you count his financial help to save them from their bad grades) What is it about Harry saving all of these Weasleys? Randy From estesrandy at yahoo.com Tue May 23 00:27:55 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 00:27:55 -0000 Subject: Math Question: Horcruxes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152702 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "steven1965aaa" wrote: > > According to Prof. Slughorn you make a Horcrux by "splitting" your > soul. So Riddle makes his 1st Horcrux. Now 50% of his soul is in > horcrux #1 and 50% remains in his body. > > When Riddle makes the 2nd Horcrux, what is split? The soul piece > which remained in his body after he made the 1st Horcrux? If so, that > 50% soul piece is now split, so Horcrux #3 contains 25% of his soul > and Voldmort retains 25% in his body. When he makes Horcrux #4 that > 25% would again be split so that Voldemort retains 12.5% of his > original soul and 12.5% is transferred to Horcrux #4. Extrapolating > to the finish, Horcrux 6 would contain 3.125% of Voldemort's original > soul and Voldemort is now left with only 3.125% of his original soul > residing inside his body. > > Is that the way it works? Is my thinking on this too linear and > not "magical" enough? Does this matter? Questions/comments/theories? > > Steven1965aaa > I remember that I found a discussion about the Eye of Horus (from Egytptian mythology) last year. The link below shows the same math formula that you describe. It is really interesting. I think JKR might have borrowed from this idea. http://www.aloha.net/~hawmtn/horus.htm Check it out! Randy From celizwh at intergate.com Tue May 23 00:28:21 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 00:28:21 -0000 Subject: When did DD become headmaster? (Was: Pince/Filch) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152703 Carol responds: > I think we can determine the approximate date that Dumbledore > became headmaster based on two things: Lupin's enrollment > in Hogwarts as a first year, which would be in 1971 if I remember > correctly, and (possibly) McGonagall's tenure as Transfiguration > teacher, which would have begun when DD stopped teaching > Transfiguration to become headmaster. That would be "thirty > years ago this December" as of OoP, or December 1965 > (which suggests a sudden replacement, as if someone had just died). houyhnhnm: Tom Riddle came to see Dumbledore (as headmaster) ten years after the death of Hepzibah Smith. "Ten years separates Hokey's memory and this one." (HBP 20) Riddle went to work at Borgin and Burkes right after leaving school. It is not known how long he stayed with them, but clearly not 20 to 25 years as he would have to have done if DD became headmaster from 1965-1970. I think you are mistaken about McGonagall. My copy of OotP says "Thirty-nine years this December." That would make her date of hire sometime in December of 1956. That date would fit with the evidence from HBP and it would make sense that Armando Dippet died at this time, Dumbledore succeeded to the headmastership, and his position as transfiguration teacher had to be filled. This doesn't exactly square with Lupin's statement in PoA that "It seemed impossible that I would be able to come to Hogwarts ... But then Dumbledore became headmaster...." According to the timline above, Lupin wouldn't even have been born, much less bitten, at the time Dumbledore became headmaster. Maybe Lupin's statement is a Flint. Maybe, because he was a small child at the time and it is a painful memory for him besides, he just got it partly wrong. Carol: > The problem here (for me) is the Weasley chronology. In GoF, > Mrs. Weasley talks not only about Pringle, the former caretaker, > but about Ogg, the gamekeeper before Hagrid. It used to be > assumed that Hagrid was made gamekeeper, or maybe the > gamekeeper's assistant, right after he was expelled from > Hogwarts at the end of his third year (June 1945), but he evidently > wasn't in that position yet when Arthur Weasley and Molly Prewett > were in school. That would have made them older than Hagrid. > But now we're told (HBP) that they got married right out of school > when Voldemort first came to power, which would be around 1970 > The problem here (for me) is the Weasley chronology. In GoF, Mrs. > Weasley talks not only about Pringle, the former caretaker, but about > Ogg, the gamekeeper before Hagrid. It used to be assumed that Hagrid > was made gamekeeper, or maybe the gamekeeper's assistant, right after > he was expelled from Hogwarts at the end of his third year (June > 1945), but he evidently wasn't in that position yet when Arthur > Weasley and Molly Prewett were in school. That would have made them > older than Hagrid. But now we're told (HBP) that they got married > right out of school when Voldemort first came to power, which would be > around 1970 houyhnhnm: Mrs. Weasley doesn't say anything to indicate that Hagrid was not there, only that there was another groundskeeper. Hagrid was around 13, wasn't he, when he was expelled? He would have to have spent some years in training. Then perhaps he spent many years as Ogg's assistant before Ogg retired. The same with Pringle. I'm sure Dumbledore would have outlawed the whips and chains when he became headmaster, but that doesn't mean that Pringle left at that time. DD doesn't ever seem to sack people. And if Pringle kept, Kreacher-like, a secret stash of torture instruments, he could have passed them on to Filch (for whom, I concede, there is not really much evidence of being Tobias Snape. Alas!) Filch's knowledge of the good old days does not bother me as much as it seems to bother you, perhaps because I have had plenty of jobs where records were kept and old, disused equipment was left lying around in lumber rooms for years. From carodave92 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 00:36:52 2006 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 00:36:52 -0000 Subject: What did Neville Forget? (was Re: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152704 carodave: I love the idea that Neville will provide the last bit of help to vanquish LV. And I also believe that Neville's poor memory has some deeper meaning (it is mentioned way too often to be a mere character description). Although he was only 1 when his parents were tortured and so couldn't know any secrets about the horcrux from them... Do you think it means anything that Neville's new wand was one of the last ones purchased prior to Ollivander's disappearance? I can't figure out what that means...but I think it has to mean something. Carodave Laura Lynn Walsh wrote: > snip> Neville to > >provide the last bit of help that Harry needs to defeat Voldemort. > >This would parallel the storyline in book one when Neville gives > >Gryffindor the last few points that they need to win the house cup! > > > >What do you guys think? > > > >Red Eye Randy > > I think JKR has discounted that Mrs. Longbottom was trying > to tell Neville anything at St. Mungos, but I like your idea, > nonetheless. I have thought for a long time that Neville's bad > memory is a symptom of the result of some curse or spell put > on him. And that eventually Neville's memory will somehow > be restored. Do we know what house Neville's parent were > in when they were at Hogwarts? > > Laura W > -- > Laura Walsh lwalsh at ... > http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com > From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Sun May 21 23:11:22 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (She Who Must Be Obeyed) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 23:11:22 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? -- "hogshead" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152705 Geoff: > It refers, I suspect, to a "hogshead" which is a large cask of wine > or beer and also used to describe a measure of wine or beer of just > over 50 Imperial gallons. It was actually only officially a measurement for wine and the original liquid measure was 63 old wine gallons (by a statute of 1423); later anywhere from 100 to 140 gallons. I wonder if translations of the books into other Germanic based languages change the name of the town to Oxhead because that's what it was called in other countries. Hogshead came first though - late fourteenth century if I remember correctly. smiles, Clare (Etymology obsessed English teacher who worked in the Hogshead in Bolton to get through Uni!) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 01:56:22 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 01:56:22 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152706 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: >> QUESTIONS > 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted > Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get > Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were > doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) > would've learned about UVs? Alla: Here is what I am doing since I want to answer as many questions of yours as possible. Not looking at what others wrote, not looking, not looking. :) Crossing my fingers that there will not be too much repetition. So, what did Twins try to make Ron to do? Something funny in a crazy way, I don't think it really important, except to let us know what UV is AND I also found this episode important because it once again showed me that where it matters Arthur absolutely most definitely participates in his kids upbringing. I think the fact that this was the only time that Ron saw his dad just as angry as his mom usually is totally impressed in his memory the seriousness of the moment. I think here would be a good time second Potioncat's claim that Arthur can be realy sexy :) I mean, ideally I would love him to be a ten or fifteen years younger, but that will do too. Have I mentioned that I love Weasleys? So I do. Both men and women. Here is hoping that at the end of book 7 the man who has a different from Malfoy's idea of what does it mean to be a wizard ( Oh, I so hope that this line is not movie contamination - don't have CoS at hand to check) and his family instead of "bloodtraitors" would get the well deserved name of the "heroes" who played important role in the Voldemort's defeat. > > 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron & > Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon her & > Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron to F&G? Do > you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing in" to Ron's > love life from hers? Alla: You know that I love Ginny and I am sure that her big brothers were nosing in her love life plenty of times and she would wish that both Twins and Ron would just back off :), but I wish she would not :) I think Ron deserved a bit of Lav-Lav in his life, without anybody getting to him , including Ginny and Twins. > 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to > tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help Draco? > Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, relying > upon others more? Alla: But OF COURSE. Look how he talks about Draco to pretty much everybody including both adults and his peers. And everybody pretty much blowns him off. Yea, that is a good way to make Harry trust adults even more :) Okay, Arthur checked, but clearly not enough, if Harry turned out to be completely and totally right. And do not get me started on Dumbledore letting a juvenile assasin run amok the school AFTER Katie Bell and Ron almost died. Grrrr. I do wonder if Albus indeed knew everything about Draco's actions, how many almost hits he would have allowed little prat to make before he would finally arrested him. Safety of the OTHER students, Headmaster, not just trying to save the murderer in making? I mean, I am pretty sure that this sets up a stage for Harry and his friends playing in the field almost with no adult presence in book 7, but I still wanted to smack them a bit. You know what is funny? We talked plenty on the list in the past that Harry needs to mature and trust adults, etc, etc. I have a friend who is also a fan of the books. I mean, she is not quite as obsessive as I am, but she loves the books, rereads them,etc. So, she HATED that Harry went to adults for help with Draco instead of relying only upon his friends. She was saying that in OOP Harry was a very realistic teenager, who was self-reliant and understandably so, but she thought that in HBP Harry digressed to the child, who runs to the adults as soon as the problems came in. I mean eventually she changed her mind a bit that Harry was so burned by the death of Sirius that he started to doubt his judgment. To each their own, I pointed to her that Harry did NOT abandon relying upon himself and his friends especially in Draco's investigation and extra help never hurts. Of course not that anybody helped him much. :) > 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape > is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get > information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's > that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's > statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these > years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is > the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the > fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When > is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry > correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? Alla: Well, yes, sure, I partially agree with you. It is a BIG question whether Snape acts or not, but IMO it matters less and less, because with every book we learn more and more Snape's horrible acts, which cannot be just shrugged off as acting. I mean, surely he was not acting when he told Prophecy to Voldemort, it is highly unlikely than when he screams "you and your filfy father", he acts either, don't you think? You know despite the drama of the Tower scene, I was SO very happy when I read this line from Snape , because that SEALED for me that James is always on Snape's mind and that Snape is having very very hard time distinguishing between father and son. So, to get back to your question. I have NO idea whether Snape was acting in that scene or not. I think it is possible that he was acting, but I don't think that in the book 7 the key to Snape's character would depend upon resolving the question of whether he is a good actor. > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and > welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds > Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet > over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not > have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? Alla: I am the one who thinks that neither Weasleys nor Fleur were on their best behaviour in their interactions through the book. In this scene I find Fleur to be SO very rude. I mean, really, you are Bill's fiance, but you also a guest in his house. You just don't call the song which your future mother in law obviuously loves so much horrible, you just don't IMO. I mean, Fleur is not stupid, she is very smart, so I was very annoyed with her in that scene. > 10. The scene with Harry, Arthur & Lupin is one which, when we look > back upon it, is clearly setting us up for the tower scene. It is > filled with the kinds of remarks and statements which feel > like "great pronouncements" or "truths" or "key insights," such > as "It comes down to whether you trust DD's judgment" and "But > Dumbledore can make mistakes" and "You are determined to hate him, > Harry" and "Has it occurred to you, Harry, that Snape was simply > pretending??" Play those lines off one another, and you pretty much > have the DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape camps after the tower scene, no? > (As well as the "DD could NEVER have been that wrong about Snape" > vs. "DD can make BIG mistakes" camps.) Comments? Additionally, > Lupin makes some remarks here about Snape which surprised some fans. > Was he speaking what he truly believed? Did you believe him? Alla: Hehe. Very very true, it does reflect very much what different Snape fractions are saying. Point for JKR for setting it so nicely. :) So, do you REALLY need to hear my comments? LOL. Okay, I hope that members of the Order will learn the hard way that DD DOES make mistakes, if apparently they have not learned it so far. As to whether I believe Lupin, well NO not at all. I was like , how about your honest opinion, eh? > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't > stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why > or why not? Alla: Poor Molly. No, I was not surprised at all, I think Molly would believe anything which supports in her hope that Percy is not such a prat as he really is IMO. > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good > but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his > behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? Alla: That is another underdeveloped character, which could be so interesting. I think he is a prat, but very BIG one. > 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and then > knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is determined not to > give it to him. We see a Harry who I would argue is self- possessed, > confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in sticking up for what he > believes is right. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or > was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What > did you think of Harry in this scene? Alla: I said earlier that I really don't think that Harry will do any super maturing in book 7, I think the only additional step would be forgiving Snape, I think THIS is Harry we will see in book 7. As you said, confident, forceful adult, who I hope would live to see the better "life" after Voldemort. > 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if > you like. Alla: Eh, I don't think he would be very relevant to Harry's quest based on their conversation at the end. Bravo, dear! Thank you so much. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 23 02:35:52 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 02:35:52 -0000 Subject: Draco, Harry & Norbert / Keeping Lupin's Secret (was:My own take on the Prank) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152708 Betsy Hp: > Because *if* Snape was really Lucius Malfoy's lapdog, he had an excellent way of getting that rather hot piece of information out to the WW general public. And the WW would not have stood for their precious children being exposed to a werewolf. Even if Dumbledore (with his powerful connections) hadn't been fired, Lupin would have been expelled for sure. And I'm betting Dumbledore would have at least been weakened. It didn't take very much for the MoM (under Fudge's rather weak and ineffective leadership) to take over Hogwarts. Ceridwen: Yes, an interesting observation by Sister Magpie. I never would have taken it where you did, Betsy! Good points! Lucius became a member of the Hogwarts Board of Governors when he was older. Was his father on the board when Lucius was in school? I don't know how boards of boarding schools work, if the positions are elected or hereditary, or what. Could someone please enlighten me? Because if so, then it would not only have gone out to the wizarding public, but Dumbledore's dismissal or being on probation might have been a done deal by the time the news got into the Prophet. Lupin would definitely have been expelled as being too dangerous for the school. It's clear that Snape believes wholeheartedly that Sirius tried to get him killed - what made him keep his mouth shut at the prospect of such a smorgasboard of mayhem? Especially since he was headed down the DE path already (I think the Prank came after their fifth year). Why would he do Dumbledore any favors? I agree that we don't have enough canon, or even secondary canon (interviews, JKR's website) to speculate. But it's very tempting to do just that, or at least to play with it a while. Ceridwen. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 23 06:11:17 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 06:11:17 -0000 Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152709 Well to get us off of our usual topic of "you know who", lets talk about LV. When DD visited him in the orphanage Tom had taken these things and was hording them. Does anyone have any ideas what these objects might mean? Why did Tom take these particular objects? Do you think that they have any special significance to the plot? Why did JKR choice these objects. You all know I love the symbolism of things in the books, any of that in these? I guess it could just be that those objects were special to the child that Tom took it from and as such he wanted to make them suffer. I wonder if there is more to it than that. I wonder if they represent anything to him? DD tells Harry that LV likes to collect things (reminds you of Slughorn). Thoughts anyone? Let's go into the depth of LV mind and of Tom Riddle's mind as a child. What will we find there? Tonks_op From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 23 06:31:17 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 06:31:17 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? -- "hogshead" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152710 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "She Who Must Be Obeyed" wrote: > > Geoff: > > It refers, I suspect, to a "hogshead" which is a large cask of wine > > or beer and also used to describe a measure of wine or beer of just > > over 50 Imperial gallons. Clare > It was actually only officially a measurement for wine and the original > liquid measure was 63 old wine gallons (by a statute of 1423); later > anywhere from 100 to 140 gallons. > > I wonder if translations of the books into other Germanic based > languages change the name of the town to Oxhead because that's what it > was called in other countries. Hogshead came first though - late > fourteenth century if I remember correctly. Geoff: For comparison, my source was the following: 'Hogshead > noun 1 a large cask. 2 a measure of liquid volume equal to 52.5 imperial gallons (63 US gallons, 238.7 litres) for wine or 54 imperial gallons (64 US gallons, 245.5 litres) for beer.' (Reader's Digest Word Power dictionary) From littleleah at handbag.com Tue May 23 09:27:07 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 09:27:07 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Alla: > > > If you can show me that Snape never killed, tortured , >poisoned people while being in Voldemort's employ, I will >absolutely say that he is not responsible for the acts of other >DE, just for his own, but I think he has plenty of blood on his >hands, NOT just by association. (snipping) > Carol responds: > The thing is, Alla, you know that we can't show you what Snape >didn't do. It's simply not possible to do that. But it's also impossible to show at this point what he did do (with a few small >exceptions) and any judgment that he has murdered or tortured >others simply because he was a DE must be based on assumption. (snipping) > JKR has had numerous opportunities to tell us what Snape did as a >DE, but aside from the eavesdropping incident, she has told us >nothing. We know only what others say he didn't do or fail to say >that he did do. Annoying and frustrating for people on both sides >of the question, but not at all enlightening. Leah chips in; I've been trying to keep out of this one, but I thought the following might be helpful, from JKR's 2004 talk at the Edinburgh Book Festival: "Q: Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and I just love him. Can he see the Thestrals, and if so, why? Also, is he a pure blood wizard? JKR: Snape's ancestry is hinted at. He was a Death Eater, so clearly he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances. You have some information about his ancestry there. He can see Thestrals, but in my imagination most of the older people at Hogwarts would be able to see them because, obviously, as you go through life you do lose people and understand what death is. But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that " I note here that the answer is that he has 'seen' rather than done. This would suggest to me that Snape has not used an AK for example. However, it is implied that he has been present when some pretty unpleasant things have been done that have resulted in death, so there must be some guilt at least by association. The words 'Snape was a Death Eater' to me imply that these things happened when Snape was a DE of his own volition, rather than as DDM. Carol again; > What we *do* have evidence for in HBP is Snape's heretofore > unsuspected gifts as a Healer. Maybe, just maybe, Harry isn't the >only one with a "saving people thing." That's the Snape angle I >hope to see more of in Book 7. Leah: I agree completely that Snape as Healer was a fascinating addition, and is one of the things that go to convince me that Snape is not on LV's side. I found the healing of Draco quite moving. However, continuing her answer to the question above, JKR said, "Why do you love him? Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know who's really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!"" I find this answer quite depressing, because it makes me feel that JKR's view of Snape is most closer to Alla's, than it is to mine or Carol's. I wonder if she is being deliberately obtuse here, because the questioner makes quite clear why she (I assume it's a she from the answer), loves Snape: it is because he is such a complex and interesting character. There may be a bit of bad boy syndrome in there, (Sexy!Snape), but that's not enough. I have very little interest in discussing Draco or his father at length, however attractive Jason Isaacs may be (I'm far too old for Tom Felton). I just get the feeling that Snape is a character that's run away from his creator- but then, what's with the healing; why make him more complex than ever? > Carol, wishing that JKR would write an eighth book, "The Autobiography > of Severus Snape" Leah: Me too! (reaches for iron). Leah From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 23 10:59:19 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 10:59:19 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas -- rude Fleur, Celestina's lyrics In-Reply-To: <44723004.9080204@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152712 > Mo: > Funny how we all see it differently! To me the lyrics remind me of > songs like Fever, and Mad About The Boy. Sultry, soft jazz type > music, I guess. I can see someone of Molly's age enjoying it, while > someone of Fleur's age would take the mickey. > Potioncat: I really imagined it as jazz too, and we know it's an old tune because Molly and Arthur danced to it when they were young. The whole scene reminds me of the old type of musical/variety Christmas shows that used to come on each year. This scene was funny because Molly seemed to be the only one who actually liked the music and Fleur was the only one who complained. I was thinking that if it was jazz the lyrics would seem sensual but if it were rap, the words would seem vulgar. (The shocking sexual music of my youth is fine, the shocking sexual music of my teenagers is not.) ;-) From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 23 11:08:44 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 11:08:44 -0000 Subject: Punishment for the trio (was Re: My own take on the Prank) In-Reply-To: <20060523001243.8287.qmail@web37212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152713 > Catherine now: > Actually, Draco doesn't get any points taken away from Slytherin. Harry, Hermione and poor Neville who got caught tyring to warn Harry and Hermione about Draco each get 50 points taken away from Gryffindor. Potioncat: Draco loses 20 points for Slytherin and McGonagall is going to talk to his Head of House. It sounds as if they are going to Snape that moment. (end of ch 14, SS/PS) If McGonagall has just spoken to Snape about Draco's being out of bounds and his lies, then discovers the Trio are the cause of it....it's no wonder she was livid. She would have to do the honorable thing and let Snape know that it was a set-up. (as that is what she thinks it is.) She says she's never heard of 4 students wandering around in the middle of the night. I'm still not sure if that means the Marauders never got caught or if she is just being dramatic. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 23 11:21:08 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 11:21:08 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152714 > Alla: > > But OF COURSE. Look how he talks about Draco to pretty much > everybody including both adults and his peers. And everybody pretty > much blowns him off. Yea, that is a good way to make Harry trust > adults even more :) Okay, Arthur checked, but clearly not enough, if > Harry turned out to be completely and totally right. Potioncat: Actually, Arthur checked. But the broken vanishing cabinet never was at the Malfoy house. Lucius started getting rid of incriminating items several years before, and, his house had been searched before. There really wasn't anything to find.(Or else it was very well hidden.) This was a nice set-up. It made Draco look less guilty. From josturgess at eircom.net Tue May 23 12:44:52 2006 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 12:44:52 -0000 Subject: Slight-OT: Hogworts, Plus Dragon Blood (was: Wordplay...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152715 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > >snip> > > > Interestingly, there is a plant called "Dragon's Blood" - > > http://botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/d/dragon20.html > > Maybe the 12 uses of Dragon's Blood is not really the 12 uses of > DRAGON's Blood. > > Just passing it along. > > Steve/bboyminn Good spot! I followed the link and was very pleased to read... 'Dracaena Draco is a giant tree of the East Indies and Canary Islands, and shares with the baobab tree the distinction of being the oldest living representative of the vegetable kingdom, being much reverenced by the Guanches of the Canaries, who use its product for embalming in the fashion of the Egyptians. The trunk cracks and emits a red resin used as 'tear' Dragon's Blood, now rarely seen in commerce' I think you may well be onto something here! 'oldest living.....embalming....Egyptians....trunk cracks.....tear' How like the necessaries for HRX creation I muse. One of those 12 uses of Dragon's Blood, the one DD might feel a tiny bit guilty about? Wandering off into plant names 'Mimbulus Mimbletonia': Mimosa = aka the sensitive plant Nimbus = aura Mimbus = sensitive to auras Things we know: Neville was given the plant by Uncle Algie, it is rare. Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville were all blasted with stink sap from the plant and Ron and Hermione were not. Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville all `hear voices' by the veiled gateway whilst Ron and Hermione don`t. The veiled gateway `kills' people, manner unspecified. In the Potterverse it is possible to separate the soul from the body. Ollivander did a bunk shortly after Neville visited his shop to buy a new wand. Ollivander had an old wand in display in his window. Voldy likes to use the founder's items to make HRX. Pure speculation: Ollivander's display wand was Rowena Ravenclaw's and therefore is a HRX contender. Ollivander's departure was a direct result of Neville's visit. Neville said or did something to precipitate this, perhaps show an inconvenient interest in the display wand for example. Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville all heard voices at the veiled gateway as a result of being stink sapped. These are the voices of the dead, souls separated from the body passing through the veil. If Neville is sensitive to separated souls in the veiled gateway he might also be sensitive to a bit of soul lurking in a HRX. The locket mentioned in the clearout of Grimmauld Place is that of Salazar Slytherin and also a HRX contender but the stink sapping occurred after interaction with the locket and therefore could have passed undetected. Result: Hooray! no need to randomly vandalise every ancient relic in the magical world, simply wave suspect item at a `diviner' and quicker that you can say CAT scan instant HRX detection. Regards Jo From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 23 13:01:23 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 09:01:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Winged boars (was Re:Wordplay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060523130123.61914.qmail@web37206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152716 Geoff Bannister wrote: The point of my last paragraph which you quoted was that it is interesting that Jo Rowling actually makes a specific reference to the winged boars on the pillars on /every/ occasion that Harry comes through the gates on his way to the school which seems a bit of an overkill. We know that they are there, why reinforce our memory with a sledgehammer? Catherine now: Because I had never remembered them from book to book. I don't think they'll be important in book 7, but it's a decription of the gates as he passes through them. It never bothered me, obviously, since I never remembered they were there! Catherine --------------------------------- Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mjf152 at yahoo.co.uk Tue May 23 06:06:23 2006 From: mjf152 at yahoo.co.uk (Maureen) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 07:06:23 +0100 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas -- rude Fleur, Celestina's lyrics In-Reply-To: <44723004.9080204@yahoo.co.uk> References: <44723004.9080204@yahoo.co.uk> Message-ID: <4472A65F.3060708@yahoo.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 152719 Mo: Yahoomort seemed to have a nibble when I posted this last night, so I'm trying again! SSSusan wrote: > While Remus stares into the fire, Celestina sings: > > Oh, come and stir my cauldron, > And if you do it right, > I'll boil you up some hot strong love > To keep you warm tonight. > > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm > and welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, > finds Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude...? Mo: I think Fleur was being VERY rude here. To me, the scene reads like it's a traditional Christmas evening for the Weasleys, which their guests are sharing in. Having spent time living with my OH's family, things like that you just have to adapt to and fit in with. Her rudeness, to me, doesn't just reflect on her attitude to the music, but how she feels about the way the Weasleys live. Potioncat: > It reminds me of rap lyrics, and if it was my kids listening to it, > I'd want to turn it off too! Mo: Funny how we all see it differently! To me the lyrics remind me of songs like Fever, and Mad About The Boy. Sultry, soft jazz type music, I guess. I can see someone of Molly's age enjoying it, while someone of Fleur's age would take the mickey. Mo From tareprachi at yahoo.com Tue May 23 07:51:41 2006 From: tareprachi at yahoo.com (pforparvati) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 07:51:41 -0000 Subject: Math Question: Horcruxes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152720 wrote: > According to Prof. Slughorn you make a Horcrux by "splitting" > your soul. So Riddle makes his 1st Horcrux. Now 50% of his soul > is in horcrux #1 and 50% remains in his body. When Riddle makes > the 2nd Horcrux, what is split? The soul piece which remained in > his body after he made the 1st Horcrux? If so, that 50% soul piece > is now split, so Horcrux #3 contains 25% of his soul > Voldemort is now left with only 3.125% of his original soul > residing inside his body. pp now: Hello everybody!! Writing first time to the group. Joined recently... Well, IMO this theory sounds logical. It concludes that the first horcrux LV made must be more stronger and last horcrux along with LV soul in the body will be weaker comparitively. This explains why a great wizard like DD had to sacrifice the whole of his hand while destroying the ring. It must have been the 1st horcrux. The locket can be 2nd and the diary may have been among the last so it was easy for Harry to destroy it.. If this is correct, then it'll be easier for Harry to destroy the other remaining weaker horcruxes (comapratively) and at the end, LV. pp, hoping to find some canon to this theory so that it will be easy for Harry to destroy LV From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 13:51:26 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 09:51:26 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ Message-ID: <49c.6415f1.31a46d5e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152721 In a message dated 23/05/2006 07:11:54 GMT Standard Time, tonks_op at yahoo.com writes: Does anyone have any ideas what these objects might mean? Why did Tom take these particular objects? Do you think that they have any special significance to the plot? Thoughts anyone? Let's go into the depth of LV mind and of Tom Riddle's mind as a child. What will we find there? A yo-yo is the simplest of childhood toys. A thimble is something which women used and collected, my great-grandmother (who would have lived in the same time as LV's grandmother collected them - it was a time when mothers made many of their children's clothes. A mouth-organ - father's teach their sons - my son has received one from his Welsh grandfather and another from his Scottish great-grandfather. Music was only available to those who made it themselves. They could be symbols of missing experiences and missing relationships. Nobody gave him toys, his mother never made his clothes, his father never passed on a musical tradition. There is also the fact that children from disfunctional backgrounds often resort to cleptomania as a way to both seek attention and gain the items that they think they lack. I have a student who is beaten by his father (mother absent) and he steals books and other children's trinkets. I think it is illustrative of character but not necessarily of plot. It is difficult to get such children to talk; once they have been warped into a disfunctional adult there is little that can be done. The horcrux issue has been raised and will undoubtedly be followed in book 7 as they track down the horcruxes. Unless we're going to get a shot of Voldy playing the harmonica in his mouldy cellar, I think we're done with the trinkets. I'd quite like to see that though! smiles, Clare xx From adzuroth at hotmail.com Tue May 23 05:18:28 2006 From: adzuroth at hotmail.com (Adzuroth) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 05:18:28 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152722 "Adzuroth" wrote: > > > > > > Am I the only one who thinks there's something a wee bit wrong > with the belief that Dumbledore suddenly got tired of living and > decided to die on his knees at the hands of Snape, begging for his > life? I always thought DD had a little more pride than that, and > would have prefered to look Snape square in the eye and say "just do > what you've gotta do". DD more than likely wanted the rest of the > wizarding world to believe he was dead so Voldy and the DE's would > have a huge false sense of security. They would then become much > bolder than ever before, which would lead them to make mistakes that > P.S.- anyone have an idea as to why JKR called the undead inferi > > instead of using the more popular nomenclature of zombies? > > Tonks: > > DD was not begging for his life. He did not summon the house elves > or Fawkes for a reason. Whether or not you agree with my > interpretation of the Christian symbols (see post #151730) there are > still good reasons as to why the events on the tower happened as > they did. DD saved Harry, Draco, and Snape by dying. And DD is > really dead. It would serve no good purpose to pretend to be dead > and leave the WW in such grief and the school possibly closed. That > would be a coward's way, and DD is not a coward. > > Snape saved DD's body from being eaten by Greybeck by doing a non- > verbal to send him over the edge. And inferni are the soul of the > damned in hell. Or of the shades in Hades. > > Tonks_op > Adzuroth: I read your post about Christian symbols, and it makes for a very compelling argument (and I'll bet you're a lawyer in RL too ;) ). However, I'd like to direct your attention to Mathias Forseti's post (#152480) which elaborates on some of the discrepencies behind DD's death scene. It makes for a pretty compelling countercase for those pro-death believers out there. Also, for Snape to send DD over the edge and kill him at the same time would mean he had to simultaneously cast two spells, a feat no wizard has ever done in any of the books (to the best of my memory that is). Furthermore, if DD is the greatest wizard alive, would it be too much of a stretch to say that he might have found a counterspell to neutralize the unbreakable vow (in a similar manner that Snape used a countercurse for Harry during his Quidditch match back in book 1)? From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 13:27:17 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 13:27:17 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152723 Leslie41: > Nope. Not fair. And highly inappropriate. And dangerous. And > stupid. And a whole lot of other things. Depends, I suppose, on whether you're willing to take people as they are or whether you try to hold things up to some kind of abstract standard. The fact is, IMO, people just aren't going to give mean people a break. And it is not appropriate that mean people be given a break. They have simply forfeited all claim to such things through their behavior. And that's perfectly fair that things be that way. There is a tendency for things to balance out in the great scheme of things, and the harshness with which mean people are judged is what they are due. Niceness, on the other hand, does get its reward in the great balance wheel of things. And getting passes is part of it. So yes, Hagrid gets a pass for his poor teaching. And Lupin gets a pass for his problems. Snape, on the other hand, most certainly does NOT get a pass for his abusive methods, no matter how effective they might be. That's just the way the world is. And, in the great scheme of things, it is perfectly fair and appropriate that it be so. Lupinlore From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 13:28:03 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 13:28:03 -0000 Subject: Slight-OT: Hogworts, Plus Dragon Blood (was: Wordplay...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152724 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" wrote: > > Ollivander's display wand was Rowena Ravenclaw's and therefore is a > HRX contender. > Ollivander's departure was a direct result of Neville's visit. > Neville said or did something to precipitate this, perhaps show an > inconvenient interest in the display wand for example. > Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville all heard voices at the veiled > gateway as a result of being stink sapped. > These are the voices of the dead, souls separated from the body > passing through the veil. > If Neville is sensitive to separated souls in the veiled gateway he > might also be sensitive to a bit of soul lurking in a HRX. > The locket mentioned in the clearout of Grimmauld Place is that of > Salazar Slytherin and also a HRX contender but the stink sapping > occurred after interaction with the locket and therefore could have > passed undetected. > > Result: > > Hooray! no need to randomly vandalise every ancient relic in the > magical world, simply wave suspect item at a `diviner' and quicker > that you can say CAT scan instant HRX detection. > > Regards > Jo > Najwa: Excellent theory Jo! I do think that Neville and his plants should be useful in the last book, his Herbology talents haven't really helped much at all in the series, and as "the boy who lived" prospect, he needs to help somehow I think. I do hope this next book will be the longest, because I feel she has a lot to elaborate on. Najwa From lessnitch at yahoo.com.au Tue May 23 11:06:58 2006 From: lessnitch at yahoo.com.au (lessnitch) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 11:06:58 -0000 Subject: Harry's Fate Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152725 As a mother and a HP fan, I am really concerned about Harry's fate. Will he live happily ever after and does JKR have a big shock in store for us? HP has had a tough life, what with the Dursleys and all. Although, his friendships with Ron and Hermione have been great for him. Knowing about the prophecy must always be in the back of his mind and this must terrify HP. Any thoughts? Are others worried? I think Harry deserves a future with Ginny preferably (I think HP & G will be great together). I know people are going to die in the last book but I hope it is none of our heroes. From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 13:34:50 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 09:34:50 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? -- "hogshead" Message-ID: <443.1644226.31a4697a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152726 >Geoff: >For comparison, my source was the following: >'Hogshead > noun 1 a large cask. 2 a measure of liquid volume equal >to 52.5 imperial gallons (63 US gallons, 238.7 litres) for wine or >54 imperial gallons (64 US gallons, 245.5 litres) for beer.' >(Reader's Digest Word Power dictionary) Clare now: This is an excerpt from the statute itself (the Roman numerals mean 3 score and 3 = 63): "1423 Rolls Parlt. IV. 256/1 Tonnes, Pipes, Tertians, Hoggeshedes of wyn of Gascoign..shulden be of certein mesure..the Terciane IIIIXX IIII galons, the Hogges~hede IIIXX III galons." Oxford English Dictionary: "... Such a caskful of liquor; a liquid measure containing 63 old wine-gallons ..." "In later use varying from 100 to 140 gallons; the hogshead ... in 1749 ... fixed at 100 gallons. " Your Imperial equivalent is correct (53 Imperial gallons) but this measurement was never used and is not used now. The hogshead was out of use during Imperial measurements and we are now metric. For interests sake, the first person to use it as a metaphor (which is the beginning of the linguistic line which culminates (for now) in Rowling's use) was Boswell in 1769 - "a hogshead of sense" smiles, Clare xx From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 23 14:47:37 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 14:47:37 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape/ Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152727 Lupinlore: > Niceness, on the other hand, does get its reward in the great > balance wheel of things. And getting passes is part of it. So yes, > Hagrid gets a pass for his poor teaching. And Lupin gets a pass for > his problems. Snape, on the other hand, most certainly does NOT get > a pass for his abusive methods, no matter how effective they might > be. That's just the way the world is. And, in the great scheme of > things, it is perfectly fair and appropriate that it be so. Magpie: But clearly he does get a pass by many people, because different people have different priorities. It depends on what an individual person finds the most annoying or the most important. If it were as clearcut as nice people getting a pass and mean people not getting a pass, Snape wouldn't have so many fans, and everyone would agree on the character. Hagrid really doesn't get much of a pass on his teaching--less than Snape does in many ways, imo. What's interesting about the Snape discussion is in some ways he goes straight to this, that, to quote Sondheim, "nice" is different than "good," and even a good nice person may be the one to make the immoral choice under pressure, while the not nice person may be the one to do the right thing. Snape has, in his way, always seemed to symbolize this to people. Like in the recent comparisons to a doctor, it's not that one is choosing between a doctor who cures people for money and a doctor who cures people because he loves his calling. It's more looking at the grey area where a doctor is faced with curing someone he does not like, a person he would really rather be dead. Does he do his duty when it isn't personally pleasing to him? Leah: I find this answer quite depressing, because it makes me feel that JKR's view of Snape is most closer to Alla's, than it is to mine or Carol's. I wonder if she is being deliberately obtuse here, because the questioner makes quite clear why she (I assume it's a she from the answer), loves Snape: it is because he is such a complex and interesting character. There may be a bit of bad boy syndrome in there, (Sexy!Snape), but that's not enough. I have very little interest in discussing Draco or his father at length, however attractive Jason Isaacs may be (I'm far too old for Tom Felton). I just get the feeling that Snape is a character that's run away from his creator- but then, what's with the healing; why make him more complex than ever? Magpie: I know just how you feel--but if it helps, I've come to really believe that this kind of thing is nothing but a distraction. Talking about whether people find Jason Isaacs or Tom Felton or Alan Rickman cute (mostly Tom or Alan) is a safe topic. Whenever JKR does this she's not talking about canon or the story or the characters. Her interviews maybe always sound like she sees the characters more like readers who couldn't care less if Slytherin characters fell off a cliff, but they're still the characters she herself gets her main story from. All roads in canon seem to lead to Snape especially. For years people quoted interviews at me to tell me I was all wrong in ways where I was actually right, so I read the interviews a bit different now. -m From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Tue May 23 14:59:38 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 14:59:38 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? -- "hogshead" In-Reply-To: <443.1644226.31a4697a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152728 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ClareWashbrook at ... wrote: > > >Geoff: > > >For comparison, my source was the following: > > >'Hogshead > noun 1 a large cask. 2 a measure of liquid volume equal >to 52.5 imperial gallons (63 US gallons, 238.7 litres) for wine or >54 imperial gallons (64 US gallons, 245.5 litres) for beer.' > > >(Reader's Digest Word Power dictionary) Clare: > This is an excerpt from the statute itself (the Roman numerals mean 3 score and 3 = 63): > > "1423 Rolls Parlt. IV. 256/1 Tonnes, Pipes, Tertians, Hoggeshedes of wyn of Gascoign..shulden be of certein mesure..the Terciane IIIIXX IIII galons, the Hogges~hede IIIXX III galons." > > Oxford English Dictionary: > > "... Such a caskful of liquor; a liquid measure containing 63 old > wine-gallons ..." > > "In later use varying from 100 to 140 gallons; the hogshead ... in 1749 ... fixed at 100 gallons. " > > Your Imperial equivalent is correct (53 Imperial gallons) but this > measurement was never used and is not used now. The hogshead was out of use during Imperial measurements and we are now metric. > > For interests sake, the first person to use it as a metaphor (which is the beginning of the linguistic line which culminates (for now) in Rowling's use) was Boswell in 1769 - "a hogshead of sense" Geoff: What is interesting from your statute is the unorthodox use of Roman numerals. 63 should be rendered LXIII. It's also of interest that the "old" wine-gallon mentioned in the OED reference seems to equate to the US gallon. Perhaps I shall have to go into the Hog's Head in Hogsmeade and order a hogshead of wine for Bill and Fleur's wedding paid from my account at Hogwarts. Try saying that ten times quickly. Fred and George might kick off having a go.... BTW, please do not use bad language on the group. As a true-born Englishman, I must close my ears to the use of the word "metric" . :-) From iam.kemper at gmail.com Tue May 23 15:15:20 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 08:15:20 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40605230815j6144e7c0j71010cb2da830705@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152729 On 5/22/06, Tonks wrote: > > Well to get us off of our usual topic of "you know who", lets talk > about LV. When DD visited him in the orphanage Tom had taken these > things and was hording them. Does anyone have any ideas what these > objects might mean? Why did Tom take these particular objects? Do you > think that they have any special significance to the plot? Why did JKR > choice these objects. You all know I love the symbolism of things in > the books, any of that in these? > > I guess it could just be that those objects were special to the child > that Tom took it from and as such he wanted to make them suffer. I > wonder if there is more to it than that. I wonder if they represent > anything to him? DD tells Harry that LV likes to collect things > (reminds you of Slughorn). > > Thoughts anyone? Let's go into the depth of LV mind and of Tom Riddle's > mind as a child. What will we find there? > .. . Clare responded: A yo-yo is the simplest of childhood toys. A thimble is something which women used and collected, my great-grandmother (who would have lived in the same time as LV's grandmother collected them - it was a time when mothers made many of their children's clothes. A mouth-organ - father's teach their sons - my son has received one from his Welsh grandfather and another from his Scottish great-grandfather. Music was only available to those who made it themselves. They could be symbols of missing experiences and missing relationships. Nobody gave him toys, his mother never made his clothes, his father never passed on a musical tradition. ... I think it is illustrative of character but not necessarily of plot. .. . Kemper now: Besides the obvious implication of trophies that serial killers collect from their victims, I think these specific trophies could symbolize life's needs. But before that, these trinkets could be the only items from the parents the children lost. So, mini-LV took their loved ones. Also, you have: Yo-yo: play/joy Thimble: work/safety Mouthorgan: creativity/variety So mini-LV, snatches away from his victims their loved ones, joy, safety, and variety. That's all I got. -Kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 15:24:32 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:24:32 -0000 Subject: Rowling and Snape: was: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152730 Leah: > I find this answer quite depressing, because it makes me feel that > JKR's view of Snape is most closer to Alla's, than it is to mine or > Carol's. Leslie41: It may be, on the surface. But I am of the mind that deep down, whether she has planned it or not, Rowling is extremely drawn to Snape, and probably spends more time thinking about him than any other character. HBP only reinforced this for me. I "love" Snape because I think he's the most interesting character in the books. I'm fascinated by the way Rowling will absolutely *not* let us get a firm handle on him. There are so many ways that she could have *assured* us Snape is truly bad. She never does. The idea that she could have Snape actually kill Dumbledore right before our eyes and still allow us to think that Snape might be "good" is the work of someone who really is a master of her characters. She takes great pains to complicate Snape for us. I analyze literary characters for a living, so it takes a lot to keep me interested. Snape is a great conundrum, a mystery. I have canonical support for my assessment of him, but no one will be able to say anything with surety until Book VII. > I just get the feeling that Snape is a character that's run away > from his creator- but then, what's with the healing; why make him > more complex than ever? > Leslie41: Yup. I think he's run away from her, too. I would not be surprised at ALL to find out that when she planned the books, she had something entirely different in mind for Snape than what actually ends up happening. The real reason I don't think Snape will turn out to be "bad" has nothing to do with any "evidence" I can compile to support that he isn't. The real reason I think Snape will turn out to be DDM is because I believe it will be more dramatic and fascinating in Book VII if he is. Snape being "evil" is a bit too easy, and Rowling is not one to take the easy way out when it comes to her characters. Throughout the series, she has taken great pains to undermine Harry's rock-solid beliefs about certain people. Is Sirius Black a murderer, who wants him dead too? Whoops! No! Not only isn't Black a murderer, he loves Harry, and escaped from Azkaban to try to protect him. Are Harry's father, and his godfather, the paragons of virtue and upstanding behavior that Harry believes them to be? No there as well. Thus, to my mind, presenting us in book VII with a Snape who is not only nasty outside but also nasty inside would be, well, kinda predictable and *boring*. It would also deprive her readers of the very important lesson that, as has been pointed out, "nice" is not always "good". From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Tue May 23 15:32:30 2006 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 08:32:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060523153231.45802.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152731 --- lessnitch wrote: > As a mother and a HP fan, I am really concerned > about Harry's fate. > Will he live happily ever after and does JKR have a > big shock in store > for us? HP has had a tough life, what with the > Dursleys and all. > Although, his friendships with Ron and Hermione have > been great for > him. Knowing about the prophecy must always be in > the back of his mind > and this must terrify HP. Any thoughts? Are others > worried? I think > Harry deserves a future with Ginny preferably (I > think HP & G will be > great together). I know people are going to die in > the last book but I > hope it is none of our heroes. > laurie writes: i haven't thought about it much (mostly due to denial) but i kinda feel that if Harry dies I'd like him to go out in a blaze of glory and be know for the one who defeated Lord V and not 'the boy who lived' or if He survives at least have a quiet life till the end of his days. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 23 16:20:39 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 16:20:39 -0000 Subject: Noticed Something: Draco's Helpers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152732 Recently there has been a degree of discussion about who Draco's mysterious helpers were - ---HBP,Am Ed, HB, PG 324--- Snape: "...if you are placing you reliance in assistants like Crabbe and Goyle--." Draco: "They're not the only ones, I've got other people on my side, better people!" - - - end quote - - - Now, let us travel back in time to just before Katie Bell's attack; Chapter 12 - Silver and Opals. ---HBP, Am Ed, HB, Pg --- "Can't the Order control Mundungus?" Harry demanded of the other two in a furious wispher. "Can't they at least stop him stealing everything that's not fixed down when he's at headquarters?" "Shh!" said Hermione desperately, looking around to make sure nobody was listening; there were a couple of warlocks sitting close by who were staring at Harry with great interest, and Zabinin was lolling against a pillar not far away. "Harry, I'd be annoyed too, I know it's your things he's stealing --" - - - end quote - - - "...a couple of warlocks sitting close by who were staring at Harry with great interest, and Zabinin was lolling against a pillar...", seems odd that JKR would point these people out at just that moment unless they were important. This is especially true since this scene occur just before Katie Bell is attacked by the Cursed Opal Necklace. If fact, if you leave this information out of the paragraph where Hermione speaks, it reads just the same. Now, it could be JKR just adding 'atmosphere' to the scene, but like I said, the scene reads just fine without that information. So, I logically conclude that Draco has both inside and outside help; Death Eaters, Voldemort supporters (voluntary & involuntary), and fellow students other than Grabbe and Goyle, who we all know aren't that bright. So, it seems logical that Draco contacted someone on the outside to prepare for these secondary attacks (necklace, and later, the Mead). Some one outside the school Imperioused Rosemerta and told her to follow Draco's orders which he would send to her using an enchanted coin. But that raises another issue, how is Draco communicating with people outside the school. Everything is being closely monitored, so it is unlikely that he is using Owl Post, and it's unlikely that he is sneaking out of the school to meet someone at the gate, and he certainly isn't sneaking off of the school grounds. The enchanted coin he uses to contact Rosemerta I think is fine to control her, but that doesn't explain how he is contacting and engaging the complex assistance of Death Eaters. He certainly must have some covert means of communications, but what is it? Of course the books doesn't tell us, so we are completely in the realm of speculation, but it seems an important deatail, and it seems a vulnerability in Hogwart's defenses. So, what could it be? Two way mirrors - The implication regarding Harry and Sirius's communications mirrors seems to be that this is not a common object. But in my fan fiction I have speculated that this could serve as the wizard world's equivalent of the 'mobile/cell phone'. I can't imagine why it isn't a reasonable well known enchantment. Perhaps, it is used so rarely because there are some limitation on the Charm that we are not currently aware of. Patronus - We know the Order communicated using their Patronus, but again we don't know the limitations of that. Perhaps, it is simply the appearance of a known Patronus form that alerts the receiver to get into contact with the sender. I think it is somewhat implied that the Patronus can carry a short verbal message, but how short or long is unclear. I speculate that you can not carry on a dialog or conversation via Partonus; it's more like email than a telephone. Both of these would be undetectable and unstoppable, although a silvery Patronus form rushing out of the castle might be noticed by someone. Yet, it certainly can't be stopped, which is why the Order uses it. Still JKR hasn't given us any hint, at least none that I recognise. Perhaps, this will be unimportant in the final book, but it does seem to be a vulnerability in Hogwart's defenses, and even though Draco is gone, there are, or seem to be, Voldemort sympathizers still at the school. They would logically need to communicate, especially those who were helping Draco during HBP. It also seems reasonable that Voldemort will plan to attack the school now that Dumbledore and Snape are gone. If you control the school, you control the children of the wizard world, and in controlling them, you control the wizard world. It seems too tempting a target for it not to be attacked. Of course, Voldemort doesn't always pursue the most logical course. But it seems difficult to believe he won't see the strategic advantage of controlling the school. Still, the thing that bothers me regarding covert communication is that JKR doesn't seem to have dropped any hints or clues. So, does this mean it is unimportant, or that she is saving it for the next book? Any ideas on what the covert communications might be? Enquiring minds want to know. Steve/bboyminn From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 15:20:38 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:20:38 -0000 Subject: Harry's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152733 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lessnitch" wrote: > > As a mother and a HP fan, I am really concerned about Harry's fate. > Will he live happily ever after and does JKR have a big shock in store > for us? HP has had a tough life, what with the Dursleys and all. > Although, his friendships with Ron and Hermione have been great for > him. Knowing about the prophecy must always be in the back of his mind > and this must terrify HP. Any thoughts? Are others worried? I think > Harry deserves a future with Ginny preferably (I think HP & G will be > great together). I know people are going to die in the last book but I > hope it is none of our heroes. > Najwa now: I'm sort of worrying that Harry is going to end up like the guy from the movie "The Butterfly Effect." There are different versions of this movie, but the one I saw was the one where he went to the gypsy with his mother one night and she said he wasn't supposed to be here or wasn't supposed to be alive, or something to that effect. So later on he travels back in time and pretty much kills himself when he's a fetus. I doubt Harry will kill himself, but what's to say he's really alive after all? He SURVIVED the AK, but that IS the Killing Curse. Maybe he's literally been a marked man all his life and survived this killing curse for the soul purpose of ending the whole horcrux/voldemort nightmare. If you are one to go with the Harry is a Horcrux theory, then we could explain that Harry is the personification of Voldemort's concious and guilt perhaps and has to end all of the misery that has been inflicted. It's just a thought, nothing that I 100% believe in, but it seems to look that way sometimes. Najwa From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 15:47:01 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:47:01 -0000 Subject: Word play RAB and Stubby Boardman Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152734 With all the Hub bub about RAB, I am beginning to wonder what do we know about Regalus's death, other than what Sirius said? Does anyone recall anything definite about his death or was he M.I.A. and considered dead? I know we have The Quibbler's theory on how he's parading around as Stubby Boardman, which leads me to another question, anyone up for theories about what Stubby Boardman could mean cluewise? Feel like dissecting the name and seeing if there is any wordplay that might hint at something? All it makes me think of is a short surfer, but that could just be me. Najwa, who wonders if the quibbler is taking applications and think that her work is "Quibbler worthy". From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 23 16:32:27 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 16:32:27 -0000 Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152735 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > Well to get us off of our usual topic of "you know who", lets talk > about LV. When DD visited him in the orphanage Tom had taken these > things and was hording them. Does anyone have any ideas what these > objects might mean? Why did Tom take these particular objects? Do you > think that they have any special significance to the plot? Why did JKR > choice these objects. You all know I love the symbolism of things in > the books, any of that in these? > > I guess it could just be that those objects were special to the child > that Tom took it from and as such he wanted to make them suffer. I > wonder if there is more to it than that. I wonder if they represent > anything to him? DD tells Harry that LV likes to collect things > (reminds you of Slughorn). > > Thoughts anyone? Let's go into the depth of LV mind and of Tom Riddle's > mind as a child. What will we find there? Magpie: I can't believe I'm going to post about Voldemort because we have something in common, but Dumbledore does call him "magpie-like" for a reason. That one moment in canon JKR totally got me to love Tom Riddle.:-) It's hard to explain exactly why objects have a meaning to you if you're this type of person but yes, they definitely do. (Not that my own experience or what I know of other "magpies" necessarily applies to Tom Riddle--only JKR could answer that for sure, but it seems like it does.) One doesn't have to be a thief or anything, of course. Sometimes it's just a case of collecting things or buying souvenirs. But basically the objects are totems for memory. You don't want them because they mean something to someone else but because they mean something to you, something you may or may not be able to explain. Magpies traditionally are thought to like things that are "shiny" (all corvids do) but for people "shiny" can be sort of a metaphor for some kind of inner attractive shine. It doesn't seem like Tom gets pleasure out of playing with the yo-yo or the mouth organ. Usually with this sort of thing the item brings pleasure just in itself. It's to be taken out when you want to look at it, touch it and "feel" whatever it means, be it a memory or a symbol of something that's connected to yourself. It's kind of the opposite feeling from people who will insist that objects don't mean anything, only people do. Only in this case the object is often a symbol of things more important--the object itself doesn't have to have any real value to anyone else. Often such objects aren't very valuable objectively. So I actually don't think, given Tom's horcruxes, that he takes things from other children to cause them to suffer, particularly not due to a loss of something to do with a loved one, since Tom doesn't have loved ones himself. I would think he couldn't care less whether they're suffering or not. My guess is he might even feel more like the objects are his, not theirs, because they "call" to him in some way that makes them more than a toy or a harmonica. (Oh my god, I'm now totally remembering something I *did* steal when I was probably around 5 years old where I totally felt this way and still do because of course I still have it.) The horcruxes are a great example of this. They symbolize Hogwarts and the founders, which he himself wants to possess, make part of himself/become part of himself. He literally then makes them a holder of a piece of his own soul. -m From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 23 16:33:26 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 16:33:26 -0000 Subject: What did Neville Forget? (was Re: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152736 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > carodave: > > I love the idea that Neville will provide the last bit of help to > vanquish LV. And I also believe that Neville's poor memory has some > deeper meaning (it is mentioned way too often to be a mere character > description). Although he was only 1 when his parents were tortured > and so couldn't know any secrets about the horcrux from them... > > Do you think it means anything that Neville's new wand was one of > the last ones purchased prior to Ollivander's disappearance? I > can't figure out what that means...but I think it has to mean > something. > > Carodave > > [Previus Post] Laura Lynn Walsh wrote: > > snip> > > Neville to provide the last bit of help that Harry needs to > > defeat Voldemort. bboyminn: I have also fantsized scenarios in which Neville play a critical role in the downfall of Voldemort. Neville's presence in the story must have some deeper meaning. His character is growing stronger and he has certainly shown his Gryffindor courage on more than one occassion. Perhaps, in the final battle, he and Harry will cast simultanious Killing Curse and the combined effect will be enough to totally destroy Voldemort. I haven't actually decided whether the Horcruxes are a Red Herring or not. Given how difficult that task of finding them all is, it's possible that Harry will have to face Voldemort without all the Horcruxes being destroyed. Then we will need some other loophole that gets around it. Just one minor point though, Neville was over 2 year old when his parents were attacked. Harry and Neville are only a few days apart in age. Harry was about 16 month old when his parents were attacked, and it was estimated about a year later when Neville's parents were attack. That makes Neville between 2 and 3 years old. So, Neville was reasonably aware at that age. Two to three year olds are usually walking and in crude form talking, so while Neville may not have clear memories of what happened, or the possible existance of a Horcrux, the information could be locked away in him, and he could inadvertently assist Harry in his quest. I don't think there is any significants to the story that Neville got Ollivander's last wand. I think it is significant to Neville that he has a new wand, and I think he feels luck to have gotten an Ollivander wand, but it's Cherry with Unicorn Hair, so I don't see how that can tie into the story in a significant way. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 14:47:56 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 14:47:56 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152737 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Adzuroth" wrote: > > "Adzuroth" wrote: > Furthermore, if DD is the greatest wizard alive, would it be too > much of a stretch to say that he might have found a counterspell to > neutralize the unbreakable vow (in a similar manner that Snape used > a countercurse for Harry during his Quidditch match back in book 1)? Najwa Now: I highly doubt that the Unbreakable Vow is a curse. It's a blood contract almost, IMHO. You see, Snape promised on his own life to protect Draco. I guess to me it's a bit of a deal with the devil. SO I don't see it in anyway like a countercurse at all. It's a binding contract that if you do not go through with, you die. Simple as that, and I don't think Dumbledore is the Perry Mason of the Wizarding world, you can't be good at all things you know. From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 14:52:07 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 10:52:07 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's Fate Message-ID: <405.2e97823.31a47b97@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152738 In a message dated 23/05/2006 15:37:50 GMT Standard Time, lessnitch at yahoo.com.au writes: As a mother and a HP fan, I am really concerned about Harry's fate. Will he live happily ever after and does JKR have a big shock in store for us? HP has had a tough life, what with the Dursleys and all. Although, his friendships with Ron and Hermione have been great for him. Knowing about the prophecy must always be in the back of his mind and this must terrify HP. Any thoughts? Are others worried? I think Harry deserves a future with Ginny preferably (I think HP & G will be great together). I know people are going to die in the last book but I hope it is none of our heroes. Les, It's a children's book - the hero isn't going to die. This is a series based upon and named after one character, it would be entirely too grown up to kill him at the end, no child would be able to cope with that. She won't do it. I expect another scar and other canon deaths, I have no theories on whom but none of the traditions and stories from which she has pinched bits and pieces have killed off the dominant children. I am absolutely certain that JKR isn't that stupid; it also wouldn't in keeping with the literary salutes that she has made thus far. Some of them will definitely die but Harry is unlikely to be amongst them. But then again, she could always go the way of Arthurian legend, which would kill off Harry, Ginny and Neville but Dumbledore's white tomb turn out to be an ice cave and he would come back to life - but that would imply a rather adult relationship with Snape - hmm, getting a bit silly here, Harry will live ! smiles, Clare xx [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 15:39:52 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 11:39:52 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? -- "hogshead" Message-ID: <452.16c0bfc.31a486c8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152739 Geoff writes: >> What is interesting from your statute is the unorthodox use of Roman numerals. 63 should be rendered LXIII. It's also of interest that the "old" wine-gallon mentioned in the OED reference seems to equate to the US gallon. << Clare: The numerals from the quote didn't transfer well (yahboosucks to email) - the XX is supposed to be in superscript, like a 'to the power of' denotation. It was pre-standardisation of the language, use of all aspects of it were colloquial. I don't think it is surprising that the old wine gallon matches the US one, after all, that's where the US got it from! Then the split would mean that subsequent changes never happened and the US gallon remained as of old. LMAO, I am English too and I must admit that I cook in Imperial measurements, I cannot buy in them however. With children and students who have grown up using only the metric system (except in my kitchen) I have had to accept it, it's not that hard once you get used to it - I actually miss halfpennies more than ordering pounds. smiles, Clare xx From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 23 17:05:19 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 17:05:19 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152740 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Adzuroth" wrote: > > > > "Adzuroth" wrote: > > > Furthermore, if DD is the greatest wizard alive, would it be > > too much of a stretch to say that he might have found a > > counterspell to neutralize the unbreakable vow (in a similar > > manner that Snape used a countercurse for Harry during his > > Quidditch match back in book 1)? > > > Najwa Now: > I highly doubt that the Unbreakable Vow is a curse. It's a blood > contract almost, IMHO. You see, Snape promised on his own life > to protect Draco. I guess to me it's a bit of a deal with the > devil. SO I don't see it in anyway like a countercurse at all. > It's a binding contract that if you do not go through with, you > die. Simple as that, and I don't think Dumbledore is the Perry > Mason of the Wizarding world, you can't be good at all things > you know. > bboyminn: I have to believe that anything that can be done, can be UNdone, though with in obvious and reasonable limits. Snape swore on his life to protect Draco's life for the rest of his life. That seems like quite a long time to carry the burden of Draco's life on his shoulders. I suspect Snape intended for the Vow to last as long as the 'task', and then for it to be removed. I do suspect however that only the people involved can unbind the Vow. Narcissa would have to agree to release Snape from his promise, and as the 'binder' Bellatrix would have to cast the spell to unbind the Vow. The question now becomes, are Narcissa and Bella willing to take part? Narcissa probably likes having Snape looking out for Draco, and Bella probably enjoys having Snape under the threat of death. I suspect Snape can talk them into it, but I think it's going to take some real persuading. So, my point is that to unbind yourself from a Vow, you must either word the Vow very precisely so that it has a clear end, or you must gather the involved people together and cast the magical unbinding Charm. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From celizwh at intergate.com Tue May 23 17:27:57 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 17:27:57 -0000 Subject: Wordplay/ What's fun about the HPs? -- "Uncle Algie" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152741 I just found a new one, a real groaner, while reading a recent post-- sorry, can't find it again to give credit. I missed the pun when reading the relevant passage originally. Uncle Algie who gave Neville the _Mimbulus mimbletonia_ plant. Uncle Algie, who must also have inheritied the Longbottom talent for herbology. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 17:34:04 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 17:34:04 -0000 Subject: The Malfoys' hidden room and willed Legilimency (Was: CHAPDISC: HBP16) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152742 Alla wrote: Okay, Arthur checked, but clearly not enough, if Harry turned out to be completely and totally right. > Potioncat responded: > Actually, Arthur checked. But the broken vanishing cabinet never was at the Malfoy house. Lucius started getting rid of incriminating items several years before, and, his house had been searched before. There really wasn't anything to find.(Or else it was very well hidden.) This was a nice set-up. It made Draco look less guilty. Carol adds: Also, Harry forgets to tell Mr. Weasley that he heard Draco telling "Crabbe" and "Goyle" (Polyjuiced!Harry and Ron) about a secret room in the Malfoy manor (beneath the drawing room, IIRC). He merely says that he thinks Mr. Weasley "missed something" (HBP Am. ed. 135). It's possible that Dark artifacts are still hidden there (though not the Vanishing Cabinet, of course), but I think a certain DE aunt of Draco's is hiding there, too. Surely, the reference in CoS to that room was planted there for a reason. On another note, when did Draco get the Hand of Glory? He first saw it in CoS but Lucius, who was selling rather than buying Dark artifacts at that point, didn't buy it for him. Ron seems to think that Draco had it already ("Remember that shriveled up arm Malfoy had?" HBP 130), but I think this remark is a Flint as I don't recall Harry telling Ron that Draco wanted the Hand of Glory and he (Ron) certainly hasn't seen Draco with it. Nor is there any indication that he's buying anything in "Draco's Detour." All of the conversation relates to the Vanishing Cabinets. (Harry's(?) later remark, "He was buying something at the same time," seems to be a misinterpretation/false explanation/red herring since "How would I look carrying that down the street?" relates to the B&B Vanishing Cabinet. I suppose it's possible that he bought the H of G earlier, before the part of the conversation that HRH overheard and left it with Borgin to be picked up by the DEs before they entered Hogwarts, but the scene gives no indication that he's done so. (I suppose that the Peruvian Darkness Powder could be sneaked in under the radar of Filch's Secrecy Sensor as it isn't actually "Dark"--disregarding puns). On a completely unrelated note (because I don't want to use up a post on this observation!), I think I may have run across an example of Dumbledore communicating wordlessly through eye contact/willed Legilimency, suggesting that he may have done so again with Snape on the tower (and we also have Harry's attempt to will Snape to understand his thought later in the same book, OoP). This one involves Madam Bones near the end of Harry's hearing after Fudge has told him that it's not up to him to decide what the MoM does or doesn't do: "'Of course it isn't,' said Dumbledore mildly. 'I was merely expressing my confidence that this matter will not go uninvestigated.' "He glanced at Madam Bones, who readjusted her monocle and stared back at him, frowning slightly" (OoP Am. ed. 147). Of course, this small incident could simply be an example of people who know each other fairly well communicating through an exchanged glance as Muggles do (usually accompanied by a nudge, a wink, a raised eyebrow, or rolling eyes), but given Madam Bones's intense scrutiny here, indicated by her stare and her readjusted monocle, I suggest that she's seeing something here beyond the usual "Did you catch that?" or "yeah, right!" I think he's saying, "I trust that *you* will look into it as I don't trust Fudge to do so" or something along those lines. At any rate, we know that Madam Bones is (was) a gifted witch (one reason why LV would want her dead), so I would not be at all surprised if she's a Legilimens to whom DD can send a secret, silent message which appears to Harry to be nothing more than eye contact. I see no reason for this moment (we already know that she's strict but fair, a person of integrity who's not afraid to go against Fudge) unless it's to foreshadow the same tactic of willed Legilimency, a silent message passed from one Legilimens to another in the presence of the oblivious Harry, which will be extremely important later in the series. Carol, who probably should have made these points in separate posts but expected the second one to be a minuscule P.S. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue May 23 18:23:09 2006 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (Ffred Clegg) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:23:09 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD death References: <1148314380.3091.2537.m26@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <005901c67e95$f30c3c10$8b0b6bd5@Billie> No: HPFGUIDX 152743 Najwa wrote: >I don't think he got tired of living and begged for death, I cannot >begin to understand why this death was needed, but I highly doubt he >would die in that manner to snape without there being a reason that he >knew that he must die at that moment, perhaps to let LV think that he >can get his way with harry and Hogwarts. But the death scene is a >strange one, so instead of looking at it like he begged snape to kill >him because he was tired of living, I say that snape was hesitating >and Dumbledore was somehow telepathically telling him that he needed >to kill him, because of the unbreakable vow and because he needed to >stay on as a double agent, and not die because he broke his word to >narcissa. do you see what i'm getting at? When he said "severus >please..." i do not think he was begging for snape to save his life >either. we won't know what went down that night until the next book. Not sure if this idea has ever been floated, but what if Dumbledore chose to be killed in order to save Draco's life? It was clear that Draco wasn't going to do the deed, and we can surmise that the DEs would in turn have killed him if he hadn't (perhaps they had orders to do so as a further way to punish Lucius, or just because that's what happens to DEs who disobey). Dumbledore knew this. He was a person who would willingly have died to save the life of one of his students, and did so. Thoughts anyone? hwyl Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 18:41:52 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:41:52 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152744 > >>Lupinlore: > > There is a tendency for things to balance out in the great scheme > of things, and the harshness with which mean people are judged is > what they are due. Betsy Hp: So, in the end, life is fair? I recall a character from another story-verse saying something to the effect of: "I take great comfort from the fact that life is not fair. Imagine if we actually deserved all the horrible things that happen to us!" Myself, I'd rather think that Harry is a good kid, overall, and doesn't actually deserve to lose all of his loved ones as he has. > >>Lupinlore: > Niceness, on the other hand, does get its reward in the great > balance wheel of things. And getting passes is part of it. So > yes, Hagrid gets a pass for his poor teaching. And Lupin gets a > pass for his problems. Betsy Hp: Hagrid has lost all of his students, and Lupin is unemployed. How are they getting passes? > >>Lupinlore: > Snape, on the other hand, most certainly does NOT get > a pass for his abusive methods, no matter how effective they might > be. > Betsy Hp: Snape is a respected teacher and manages to land his dream job. How is he not getting a pass? (He also becomes a Head of House at a remarkably young age. Which may explain his strictness in the classroom, actually.) > >>Magpie: > But clearly he does get a pass by many people, because different > people have different priorities. It depends on what an individual > person finds the most annoying or the most important. If it were > as clearcut as nice people getting a pass and mean people not > getting a pass, Snape wouldn't have so many fans, and everyone > would agree on the character. Hagrid really doesn't get much of a > pass on his teaching--less than Snape does in many ways, imo. > Betsy Hp: The interesting thing this raises, IMO, is how does one define "nice"? I guess "polite" is the popular definition, but doesn't this give Snape a clear-cut reason for giving Draco a pass but not Harry? After all, Draco is very polite (nice) to Snape, and Harry is most definitely not. With Hagrid, we see Hagrid being very nice to Harry but not very nice to Draco. So we see Harry giving Hagrid a pass, while Draco judges Hagrid more harshly. What's the correct form of judgement here? Should Fudge give the opinions of nice (to him) Lucius Malfoy more weight than the not so nice (to him) Albus Dumbledore or Arthur Weasley? It could be argued that the non-questioning, non-judgmental Crabbe and Goyle are nicer to Draco than the not as easily controlled Ron and Hermione are to Harry. Does this mean Draco has the better henchmen? Betsy Hp From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 17:16:44 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 17:16:44 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152745 > > bboyminn wrote: > > I have to believe that anything that can be done, can be UNdone, > though with in obvious and reasonable limits. > So, my point is that to unbind yourself from a Vow, you must either > word the Vow very precisely so that it has a clear end, or you must > gather the involved people together and cast the magical unbinding Charm. Najwa: I still think that since it is the UNbreakable Vow that it probably cannot be broken. If it were breakable then I doubt it would be titled the way it is titled. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think the only way to undo it is for Snape not to have gone through with it and just died. From blink_883 at hotmail.com Tue May 23 18:13:23 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:13:23 -0000 Subject: Word play RAB and Stubby Boardman In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152746 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > With all the Hub bub about RAB, I am beginning to wonder what do we > know about Regalus's death, other than what Sirius said? Does anyone > recall anything definite about his death or was he M.I.A. and > considered dead? I know we have The Quibbler's theory on how he's > parading around as Stubby Boardman, which leads me to another > question, anyone up for theories about what Stubby Boardman could mean > cluewise? Feel like dissecting the name and seeing if there is any > wordplay that might hint at something? All it makes me think of is a > short surfer, but that could just be me. > > Najwa, who wonders if the quibbler is taking applications and think > that her work is "Quibbler worthy". > Well, I'm not great at anagrams...but did get Spier's den(nn!) from spinner's end (where Snape lives!) so there could be something of importance in Stubby Boardman that we're missing. Another theory...well, some questions, that i've had about R.A.B are the followng: Hermione, at the end of HBP, said she'd been looking for R.A.B. How could she possibly miss Regulus (supposedly A.) Black, if it was him? Are we to assume that actually his middle name isn't Alphard? Or did he not complete his education at hogwarts, like Draco and Harry probably won't at least, so his name isn't on whatever list Hermione no doubt uncovered of past students? Remember, she found the Prince girl, Snape's mother...so...why would she be unable to find Regulus? However, despite that, it's possible that Kreacher helped Regulus because Regulus is a Black after all, and in his parents' eyes at least, an 'honourable' Black (as we hear constantly from his mother's painting - a red herring perhaps? Or a clue?), so Kreacher would have followed R's order with little/no questioning, R. could have just said "this is for lord v., top secret!". Or maybe, Kreacher knew what was going on, and betrayed Regulus, therefore R. got murdered? There seems to be too many unanswerables (for now) to allow us to come up with fresh theories on this. Ideas? Eek! WG* From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Tue May 23 19:03:19 2006 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:03:19 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Skip what you don't like; don't endlessly repeat yourself Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152747 Hi, everyone-- Many of you probably saw an irate post made Sunday; some probably were very offended and angered by it, and some probably agreed wholeheartedly with it. That's the thing about groups like this. Our members are a diverse group of people with wide-ranging interests within the HP fandom. There are always going to be topics you love, topics you hate, topics you don't care about one way or the other. But remember -- other list members love the topics you hate. That's how it goes. Therefore, make it easier on everyone, including yourself: when you see a subject heading for a topic you hate, skip those posts. Likewise, if you see a message from a list member whose comments typically send your blood pressure soaring, skip those, too. If, after reading a post which raises your blood pressure or makes you irate, you're inclined to respond rather than to delete and move on, please count to 10 before doing so! Or, better yet, let it sit overnight as your blood pressure drops and you give it some further consideration. Other side of the coin, and *just as important:* when making a post, if you are only seizing upon every available opportunity to repeat the same comments or opinion that you have already stated time and time (and time!) again, don't make the post. The group is not your own personal forum to hammer your point, so find something new to say; your fellow list members will probably love to hear your thoughts on other topics. Thanks for your cooperation on this! --The List Elves From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 19:11:04 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:11:04 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152748 > >>Magpie: > But clearly he does get a pass by many people, because different > people have different priorities. It depends on what an individual > person finds the most annoying or the most important. If it were > as clearcut as nice people getting a pass and mean people not > getting a pass, Snape wouldn't have so many fans, and everyone > would agree on the character. Hagrid really doesn't get much of a > pass on his teaching--less than Snape does in many ways, imo. > Betsy Hp: The interesting thing this raises, IMO, is how does one define "nice"? I guess "polite" is the popular definition, but doesn't this give Snape a clear-cut reason for giving Draco a pass but not Harry? After all, Draco is very polite (nice) to Snape, and Harry is most definitely not. With Hagrid, we see Hagrid being very nice to Harry but not very nice to Draco. So we see Harry giving Hagrid a pass, while Draco judges Hagrid more harshly. What's the correct form of judgement here? Should Fudge give the opinions of nice (to him) Lucius Malfoy more weight than the not so nice (to him) Albus Dumbledore or Arthur Weasley? Alla: I said several times that my definition of "niceness" is certainly NOT politeness, or at least not superficial politeness. My definition ( and of course it is only mine) of niceness is probably close to kindness. You know- treat other human beings as you wish them to treat you, that kind of stuff. That is why I am totally of the opinion that "nice" ( NOT necessarily polite, but kind , GOOD to people around you) equals goodness in the general sense. Person who torments his students on the general basis is NOT a good human being in my book, no matter whether he teaches his students something or not, because if student learns something in his class, but at the same time is so hurt in his class, that in my book is just not worth it. And yes, education means A LOT to me too. I don't necessarily agree with Lupinlore that nice teachers in the Potterverse get a pass, unfortunately I would say that they don't so far, they suffer A LOT IMO. Hagrid, who if I may brought in class Hypogriffs because they are SUPPOSED to be in the program, he just started them earlier, it is not like he brought the creatures for seventh year students in the third year class, as far as I remember, gets jerked around by the little bastard, who did not listen to the warnings, which were given loudly. Lupin, well, do I even have to start? His prospects of ever returning to teaching were ruined forever by another bastard, who seized the opportunity and certainly took the most of it. ( Boy, was I glad that JKR called Snape's action for what it was ? NOT that he had any kids safety reasons in his mind, when he did it) So, yeah, Hagrid has MANY faults as a teacher, but definitely give me Hagrid and Lupin ANY time over Snape. Hagrid had a lot to learn as to how to be consistently good teacher, and especially how to not let Dracos get to him, IMO. His first class was great, IMO. He brought superdangerous animals, who were in the programs, but he explained how to behave around them. His confidence was shaken badly. More experienced teacher would not took all of this so close to heart and continued to teach well, I am sure Hagrid will learn. The only thing is IMO carma is pretty good in JKR books for catching up with bastards, so hopefully Snape will get what he deserves at the end. JMO, Alla From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 19:10:51 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:10:51 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: <005901c67e95$f30c3c10$8b0b6bd5@Billie> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152749 Ffred wrote: > Not sure if this idea has ever been floated, but what if Dumbledore chose to be killed in order to save Draco's life? > > It was clear that Draco wasn't going to do the deed, and we can surmise that the DEs would in turn have killed him if he hadn't (perhaps they had orders to do so as a further way to punish Lucius, or just because that's what happens to DEs who disobey). > > Dumbledore knew this. He was a person who would willingly have died to save the life of one of his students, and did so. Carol responds: I was under the impression that we had discussed this possibility and that it's part of the DDM!Snape hypothesis. At any rate, I certainly agree with you that the DEs were under orders to kill Draco if he failed, hence Narcissa's terror and despair for her son until Snape takes the UV. (The alternative would be to kidnap or stun Draco and take him back with them.) I'm pretty sure that snape was the only person who could have gotten Draco off the tower alive and that both DD and Snape knew that. I think that Snape took the UV in the first place intending to protect Draco at all costs, either under DD's orders or of his own volition or both. The unanticipated final provision complicated matters, of course, but I think that both Snape and DD were willing to die for Draco. (I'm assuming, of course, a DDM!Snape who informed DD first of Draco's assignment to kill DD and then of all three provisions of the UV--DD claims to know more about the matter than Harry does, and I believe him.) I think, however, that Draco's life was not the only one at stake at that point. DD had frozen Harry so that he couldn't move while DD was alive, but the moment DD died, the spell would end. And DD was going to die no matter what; the DEs weren't going to go back to LV with the job undone. And Snape, IMO, knew from the second broom that Harry was there in his Invisibility Cloak, and would rush out fighting the moment DD died. The only way to save both Draco and Harry was for Snape to kill DD himself, sending him over the wall rather than leaving his body to be savaged by Greyback. Only if all the DEs followed Snape down the stairs could Harry be kept from trying to fight them singlehandedly. I think that somehow DD and Snape exchanged a moment of understanding, a glance that may or may not have involved willed Legilimency, in which DD conveyed to Snape that he must keep the UV, he must kill DD himself, he must get both boys off the tower and keep the DEs from killing them. So, yes, absolutely, DD died to save Draco--and Harry, and Hogwarts. He would have died in any case, but only by having Snape--no, Severus--kill him would his death be a meaningful sacrifice that did not carry three lives with it. It was important that Draco not become either a murderer or a victim, much more important that Harry be saved, and essential that Snape not die from breaking his vow because only he could save both Draco and Harry and get the DEs off the Hogwarts grounds before they took other innocent lives. Carol, just summarizing the hypothesis without providing canon support because it has been discussed before From wdcaroline at yahoo.ca Tue May 23 16:16:08 2006 From: wdcaroline at yahoo.ca (Wade Caroline) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 12:16:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Harry's Fate In-Reply-To: <20060523153231.45802.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060523161608.77011.qmail@web61217.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152750 > lessnitch wrote: > As a mother and a HP fan, I am really concerned about Harry's > fate. Will he live happily ever after and does JKR have a big > shock in store for us? HP has had a tough life, > I think Harry deserves a future with Ginny preferably (I think > HP & G will be great together). I know people are going to die > in the last book but I hope it is none of our heroes. > laurie : > I kinda feel that if Harry dies I'd like him to go out > in a blaze of glory and be know for the one who defeated Lord > V and not 'the boy who lived' . Wade: This has been bothering me for a long time. I agree with "parisfan" that this kid has had a lousy life, and the reader really roots for him. But JKR has never really indicated what Harry wants for himself. Yes, he wants to be an Auror, but won't that be a dull life once LV and the DEs are vanquished? The books do not feature Harry spending a lot of time in quiet reflection. He will be how old in Book 7? Eighteen? Nineteen? Not likely he will be settling down to raise a family at that age, with Ginny who is even younger, or anyone else. These are plot problems for JKR, and she will sort them as she will, but as a highly engaged fan, I have a bad feeling that she will choose to have Harry "go out in a blaze of glory". These are not fairy tales after all, and JKR has not shied away from killing off beloved characters before. Personally I will be heart broken but I believe the ending will be something like this: "Ron and Hermione ran up to where Harry had fallen. They held each other as they looked down at their friend and saw the red slowly disappear from his scar." From jkimmelf at mills.edu Tue May 23 17:32:20 2006 From: jkimmelf at mills.edu (Jesse) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 17:32:20 -0000 Subject: Harry's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152751 lessnitch wrote: > As a mother and a HP fan, I am really concerned about Harry's fate. > Will he live happily ever after and does JKR have a big shock in > store for us? HP has had a tough life, what with the Dursleys and > all. Although, his friendships with Ron and Hermione have been > great for him. Knowing about the prophecy must always be in the > back of his mind and this must terrify HP. Any thoughts? Are others > worried? I think Harry deserves a future with Ginny preferably (I > think HP & G will be great together). I know people are going to > die in the last book but I hope it is none of our heroes. Hi, this is my first post to the group, but I found that this was important. JK is not going to continue HP after book 7 so the only way to do that and not have a mob of people bothering her to continue to write, is to, unforunately, kill off our hero. If there is no longer a HP then how could there be a HP series? That is her only way out. I would personally love to have it all end happily ever after and we be left with R & H , and HP & G together. But you know that the end will be heroic, like HP dying to end LV and saving the day. All is safe after this final sacrifice. It would be nice to think that it will be all happy, let's hope that JK changes her mind and decides to write HP books forever and NEVER kill off any of the main characters that all our emotions are attached to. Cheers. ~Jesse From tannertalon at yahoo.com Tue May 23 17:38:45 2006 From: tannertalon at yahoo.com (tannertalon) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 17:38:45 -0000 Subject: HBP and COS Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152752 Hi Folks, This may have already been discussed, but I'm new, and thought I'd find Jo's "super-bright fans" here! On her website, Jo says when referring to the title of HBP: "I was delighted to see that a hard core of super-bright fans knew that the real title was once, in the long distant past, a possibility for 'Chamber of Secrets'" ....I don't get it. Can y'all help? Elaine From blink_883 at hotmail.com Tue May 23 19:18:48 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:18:48 -0000 Subject: GoF, duelling techniques... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152753 Just a small point but one that nobody in RL so far has managed to answer/clarify, so naturally i turn to y'all heh..; In the cemetary scene of Goblet of Fire, Harry has already gone through the taskts (obv). In the first task, he summoned his broomstick to him. Understandably, Harry, being a gryffindor, wanted to face Voldemort standing up - and i think he says as much, but why not try summoning the cup? Was it because he wanted to return Cedric's body, even though Echo!Cedric hadn't yet 'emerged' due to the Priori Incantatem? >From a literary p.o.v. this technique definitely added a whole lot more to the plot in terms of drama, esp. when Harry appears back at the school with Cedric's body - but I can't help thinking that Book 7 will be a culmination of everything we know of the magical world - all of Harry's knowledge (therefore, in a sense, ours of Harry's abilities), the ways of doing magic we have seen (e.g. wordlessly) and the techniques (transfiguring yourself into an object - armchair, in the case of Slughorn). Do you think there will be one 'type' of technique that is more important than all others? Will somebody else die to save Harry again? And - slightly off topic - What will happen to Narcissa at the hands of Voldermort? Will she be punished for making the UV or not? Apologies if this all has been said before, if so please direct me to the post/s as i couldn't find any! thanks. Look forward to reading your views, WG* From minerva_523 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 19:08:27 2006 From: minerva_523 at yahoo.com (minerva_523) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:08:27 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152754 > > bboyminn wrote: > > So, my point is that to unbind yourself from a Vow, you must either > > word the Vow very precisely so that it has a clear end, or you must > > gather the involved people together and cast the magical unbinding > Charm. > > Najwa wrote: > ...I think the only way to undo it is for Snape not to have gone through > with it and just died. Cacaia's opinion: Now,as bboyminn has mentioned:I agree that to weasel oneself out of such a thing as an unbreakable vow, one must use some wordplay. I think Snape could have gotten out of this one by saying something to the effect of: "If the Dark Lord wills it, I will carry on with Draco's task"- as opposed to the flat and simple, "yes" he gave Narcissa. From minerva_523 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 19:20:25 2006 From: minerva_523 at yahoo.com (minerva_523) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:20:25 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter as a Slytherin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152755 I am new to the group, and have joined recently. Mostly I have just read the different posts, and replied to a few. So I guess this is my first ever actual post...so here's my question... In "Philosopher's Stone", the reader finds out that Harry has potential to be placed in Slytherin. In fact, he's Not placed there due mainly to his will against it. So- Were he not to have pleaded with the hat- If he was actually placed in Slytherin- would he have become the Harry Potter we have accompanied all the way until book 6 thus far? Would he be enemies with Draco? Would he and Snape still despise one another? And, above all, would he have become infatuated with the Dark Arts and joined sides with Voldermort? In my opinion, he probably would come out a lot "darker" than the Potter who was placed in Gryffindor. I think he would, if not like, at least come to respect Snape and Draco. But, in the end, mainly due to the "prophesy", it is my opinion that he would end up hunting Voldermort down. What do you think? Cacaia From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue May 23 19:36:34 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 12:36:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Oops! Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD (continued) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060523193634.68141.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152756 > > Lanval: > > Can you point me to where in canon Sirius, post-POA, displays > > strong meanness toward anyone but Snape (and, on one occasion to > > Harry)? > > Leslie41: > Kreacher. Dumbledore even comments on Sirius' nastiness towards > him, and suggests it's unwarranted. There's also the time in OOTP when he invites Mundungus Fletcher to stay for dinner at 12GP - the guy who blew off his protection assignment to chase possible stolen goods and left Harry to confront Dementors alone, leaving him open to a MoM hearing and possible expulsion from the WW as well as some of the worst fear of his teenage life over what might happen. I still find it amazing that Sirius didn't take Fletcher apart and feed his remains to Buckbeak over that incident. It might not qualify as "mean" but it was definitely callous towards Harry. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 23 19:40:15 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:40:15 -0000 Subject: Noticed Something: Draco's Helpers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152757 bboyminn: > "...a couple of warlocks sitting close by who were staring at Harry with great interest, and Zabinin was lolling against a pillar...", seems odd that JKR would point these people out at just that moment unless they were important. This is especially true since this scene occur just before Katie Bell is attacked by the Cursed Opal Necklace. If fact, if you leave this information out of the paragraph where Hermione speaks, it reads just the same. *(snip)* But that raises another issue, how is Draco communicating with people outside the school. Everything is being closely monitored, so it is unlikely that he is using Owl Post, and it's unlikely that he is sneaking out of the school to meet someone at the gate, and he certainly isn't sneaking off of the school grounds. The enchanted coin he uses to contact Rosemerta I think is fine to control her, but that doesn't explain how he is contacting and engaging the complex assistance of Death Eaters. *(snip)* Two way mirrors Patronus *(snip)* Perhaps, this will be unimportant in the final book, but it does seem to be a vulnerability in Hogwart's defenses, and even though Draco is gone, there are, or seem to be, Voldemort sympathizers still at the school. They would logically need to communicate, especially those who were helping Draco during HBP. It also seems reasonable that Voldemort will plan to attack the school now that Dumbledore and Snape are gone. If you control the school, you control the children of the wizard world, and in controlling them, you control the wizard world. It seems too tempting a target for it not to be attacked. Of course, Voldemort doesn't always pursue the most logical course. But it seems difficult to believe he won't see the strategic advantage of controlling the school. Ceridwen: Good question, Steve! I agree that controlling the children is a way for LV to control the WW. I would even guess that, with book 7 being the last, he doesn't have the time to train these kids to be his DEs, instead he will intend to outright hold them hostage. Whether he gets that far, or if it's a post-script at the end which horrifies everyone about what could have happened if LV hadn't been defeated at that time, it's something to consider. And if it does turn out to be a post-script, then I would guess that someone is in trouble up to that point for using a curse, or for 'fighting unfairly', something which would sway people away from the good guys - you know how fickle the WW can be sometimes. And, Draco's communications are definitely a glitch in the defenses. So are the love potions the twins are able to send in disguised as perfumes. I think the love potions did triple or even quadruple duty in HBP. Their getting past Filch was obviously meant to imply that there was some breach. Oh, I just had a thought. Could memories, the swirly non-liquid, non- gas substances we see in Dumbledore's bottles, be smuggled in as perfumes or other innocent bottled products as well? This would depend on how the Pensieve works. Does it have to be a specific thing to organize and conduct the memories? Or could any bowl be charmed for that purpose in a pinch? Could Draco have brought a Pensieve with him? It would not have been detected because it isn't Dark, and the Malfoys are rich enough to afford something which may or may not be pricey in the WW. All Draco would need would be someone's memory of someone else talking (or can the Pensieve relay thoughts too? Quibbler readers... er, enquiring minds... want to know!) to get the plan, and to take someone else's memory, such as Crabbe's or Goyle's, or his own if the Pensieve communicates thoughts, to send out. It would take a while, but then, no longer than collecting the memory and sending it via owl post. And, the poisoned mead had to get into the castle some way. Was it carried in openly as a present for Dumbledore? Or was it owled in like the perfume/love potions were? Two-way mirrors might do it. You liken them to cellphones/mobile phones. Upper-class kids carry cellphones to school and gab on them all the time. Draco is a rich kid, he might not look out of place with the WW equivalent. It wouldn't be Dark, so it wouldn't have been detected. JKR said the two-way mirrors would make a reappearance if I recall correctly - she didn't necessarily have to mean the same ones Harry and Sirius had. Draco might have used the Slytherin common room's fireplace to communicate, as Harry and Sirius did in GoF. But that would run the risk of being caught by a not-so-sympathetic Slytherin or Snape. I'd keep it in the running, but far down the list. Of course, the plan could have been set in stone so to speak before school began, and the only thing Draco would need to do would be alert the DEs when he got the cabinet repaired. He could do that simply by a different coin than the one he used to communicate with Rosemerta, or he could go through the VC himself once it was repaired. He would have to have tested it before bringing DEs through it, he might have sent a test parchment through which someone at B&B's wrote on and sent back when it was received, which would elicit all the shouting Trelawney heard. Otherwise, the timeline would have been set in advance, Hogsmeade weekend being the time for Draco to get detention and to secretly communicate with Imperiused! Rosemerta. Another DE would already have given her the coin, as a tip, maybe? This DE would also have Imperiused her, and left it for Draco to make communication. And it wouldn't be hard to send a 'coded' message to Narcissa or someone else by owl to 'send along that present for Dumbledore' (mead), or for Draco to be told that 'that nice little gift has been forwarded to Hogsmeade' (necklace). All that could be arranged in advance, only the timing to be determined. I understand that the Order is the only group to use Patronuses (Patroni?) to communicate, and this was taught to them by Dumbledore. Of course, that might be another Red Herring, and that's all we *know* right now but it isn't quite true. But, until and unless we learn different, I would put that below the two-way mirrors on the Speculation Hit Parade. I'd love to hear what others might think of this! Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 23 19:43:31 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:43:31 -0000 Subject: Word play RAB and Stubby Boardman In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152758 Najwa: > With all the Hub bub about RAB, I am beginning to wonder what do we know about Regalus's death, other than what Sirius said? Does anyone recall anything definite about his death or was he M.I.A. and considered dead? I know we have The Quibbler's theory on how he's parading around as Stubby Boardman, which leads me to another question, anyone up for theories about what Stubby Boardman could mean cluewise? Feel like dissecting the name and seeing if there is any wordplay that might hint at something? All it makes me think of is a short surfer, but that could just be me. Ceridwen: If we're going for Quibbler-worthy speculation, then I'm game! How about trying reverse Spooner on the name? Stubby Boardman - Bubby Stoardman, Bubby Moardstan, Mubby Stoardban, Munty Soardban... I can't see anything there, darn it! Though I thought I might have something with Soardman (Swordman) or Moardstan (Stan Shunpike). But, alas. *sigh* A stubby boardman would also perhaps be a short man who is on the board at some corporation, bank, or school. Or, he might have lost a leg, arm or finger and be on a board. Or he might be a short (or one- legged) surfer, as you said. Or he might be habitually bored. He might smoke a lot (stubs of cigarettes) or be rich (check stubs), he might be a sign painter, or a baker rolling out his dough on a floured board. He could be an actor who treads the boards. But, I thought it was Sirius who was supposed to be ol' Stubby, and speculation changed him into his brother who may have resembled him? Anyway, with WG's post, I think we could get something Quibbler- worthy out of all of this, perhaps a special Black edition? Ceridwen. From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 23 19:45:04 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:45:04 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152759 bboyminn: > I have to believe that anything that can be done, can be UNdone, though with in obvious and reasonable limits. Snape swore on his life to protect Draco's life for the rest of his life. That seems like quite a long time to carry the burden of Draco's life on his shoulders. I suspect Snape intended for the Vow to last as long as the 'task', and then for it to be removed. The question now becomes, are Narcissa and Bella willing to take part? Ceridwen, snipping excessively again: I am still not convinced that the Unbreakable Vow will kill someone if they break it. The name implies, to me, that the vow cannot be broken. If the person intends not to keep it, then it forces him or her to keep it anyway. It cannot be broken. It seems that Snape was expecting the first two clauses, but not the third (hand twitch). With the bindings already around his and Narcissa's hands, it may have been too late or not possible, to back out at that point. I think this adequately explains the look of hate and revulsion, the screaming, the mirroring of Fang's agony - Snape had to do it, as if it was Imperius acting on him. The reason I think this is because kids sometimes get things wrong. Ron was five when the twins tried to have him take a UV - what if it was something dangerous that could have gotten him hurt or killed, and he would be compelled to do it because of the UV? That would also explain Arthur's anger, and his saying that the (that particular) UV would kill you (Ron). Before someone asks, I was thinking something stupid for Ron to do that would be funny to the twins - walking on power lines on the road to town, or laying on a rail road track, or whatever - until, of course, it turned tragic. Five year olds don't necessarily understand that something may be specific to a particular incident; seven year olds don't necessarily understand that just because it would be funny, it might also be dangerous or lethal. But, yes, it would make sense for the original parties to be able to undo the vow. It might also be possible for some sort of legal professional to cast some revocation, or a healer to undo it - there would have to be some sort of provision in case one or more of the original parties died or were otherwise unavailable or unwilling. Ceridwen, rambling as usual. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 19:45:14 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 19:45:14 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter as a Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152760 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "minerva_523" wrote: > > I am new to the group, and have joined recently. Mostly I have just > read the different posts, and replied to a few. So I guess this is my > first ever actual post...so here's my question... > In "Philosopher's Stone", the reader finds out that Harry has > potential to be placed in Slytherin. In fact, he's Not placed there > due mainly to his will against it. So- Were he not to have pleaded > with the hat- If he was actually placed in Slytherin- would he have > become the Harry Potter we have accompanied all the way until book 6 > thus far? > Would he be enemies with Draco? Would he and Snape still despise one > another? And, above all, would he have become infatuated with the Dark > Arts and joined sides with Voldermort? > In my opinion, he probably would come out a lot "darker" than the > Potter who was placed in Gryffindor. I think he would, if not like, at > least come to respect Snape and Draco. But, in the end, mainly due to > the "prophesy", it is my opinion that he would end up hunting > Voldermort down. What do you think? > Cacaia > Najwa: Interesting train of thought. I do think that considering how much pain Harry has been through, that he might have had an interest in the dark arts, had he been a slytherin, however I think he would have used them against LV due to the fact that most of the pain that has been inflicted on Harry is either directly or indirectly because of LV. Firstly, LV killed Harry's parents and deprived him of two people who truly loved him and would have given him a happy childhood, and secondly, due to LV killing Harry's parents, he had to live with the horrible Dursleys and put up with their abuse his whole childhood. So I highly doubt he would have joined LV's side. However, after recent theories of Harry being a Horocrux of LV, I think that is the reason why the Sorting Hat wanted to put him in Slytherin, and not because of Harry himself. From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 19:51:57 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:51:57 EDT Subject: Harry Potter as a Slytherin Message-ID: <481.905d8e.31a4c1dd@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152761 _Iminerva_523 at yahoo.com_ (mailto:Iminerva_523 at yahoo.com) writes: In my opinion, he probably would come out a lot "darker" than the Potter who was placed in Gryffindor. Clare: Darker than casting Snape's slashing curse and trying to Crucio someone? With the prophecy in force, LV was always going to hunt him down. As a potential death-source he would not even be able to have him as a minion, it would be too dangerous. Therefore if he is to have any allies, Harry is trapped on the side of the light whether it suits or not. As light is synonymous with good, Harry isn't 'trapped' but naturally inclined in that direction. I think that the inclusion of the sorting decision is to highlight certain character traits of Harry's. Of course he wouldn't be entirely the same person, every decision every person makes bends their path a little and any other bend would make them different. This is a series of books though and as much as we can analyse them to death, they are merely that. The character only possesses that which the author consciously and unconsciously added to them, there is nothing more and the character does not evolve on their own and have a parallel universe potential (unless one reaches for the fanfic, in which case one can find every possible parallel universe written in bloodcurdling grammar-free prose). If we take the character of Harry out of the context of being a fabricated being in a book, then there is very little to him. He's an everyman and deliberately so. Would he hate Draco? Yes, he already did because his attitudes and prejudices offended him. Would he and Snape despise one another? Yes, because Harry's attitude to Snape is reactive and the causes of Snape's behaviour would not differ because Harry was aligned with his house. Would he become infatuated with the Dark Arts? He does anyway. Would he turn to the Dark side? No, he can't can he - the Dark side wants him dead because of the prophecy, being in Slytherin would probably offend the Dark Lord all the more. Dealing with him as a real person and this as a plausible situation - I think, if he had ended up in Slytherin he wouldn't have made friends that could have gotten him through the Professor's traps in PS and LV would have succeeded in COS and he'd be dead. smiles, Clare x From klhutch at sbcglobal.net Tue May 23 18:03:49 2006 From: klhutch at sbcglobal.net (Ken Hutchinson) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:03:49 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152762 Hi all, First post here. I only intended to lurk while enduring the long wait for the final installment but I find myself drawn in by this line of reasoning. I don't have the familiarity with the text that so many of you have. I have seen a lot of speculation in various places about whether Snape is a double, triple, quadrupule, ..., or n-tuple agent and naturally have engaged in that myself. This exchange gave me a sudden new (to me) thought: could Snape have been a simple secret agent all along, Dumbledore's plant in the DE from the beginning? Could that theory be squared with what we know of Snape's DE career? It would require that he appear useful to the DE without committing any real crimes. DD would be certain that Snape was not a DE now if he had never really been one. Or as certain as anyone could be. DD could not *ever* tell anyone the reason for his trust of Snape if this were the reason. At the least it would be the end of Snape's role as spy and it would lead to his instant death if the DE caught him. Ken. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 17:44:28 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 17:44:28 -0000 Subject: The Malfoys' hidden room and willed Legilimency (Was: CHAPDISC: HBP16) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152763 > Carol Wrote: > On a completely unrelated note (because I don't want to use up a post > on this observation!), I think I may have run across an example of > Dumbledore communicating wordlessly through eye contact/willed > Legilimency, suggesting that he may have done so again with Snape on > the tower (and we also have Harry's attempt to will Snape to > understand his thought later in the same book, OoP). This one involves > Madam Bones near the end of Harry's hearing after Fudge has told him > that it's not up to him to decide what the MoM does or doesn't do: > > "'Of course it isn't,' said Dumbledore mildly. 'I was merely > expressing my confidence that this matter will not go uninvestigated.' > > "He glanced at Madam Bones, who readjusted her monocle and stared back > at him, frowning slightly" (OoP Am. ed. 147). > > Of course, this small incident could simply be an example of people > who know each other fairly well communicating through an exchanged > glance as Muggles do (usually accompanied by a nudge, a wink, a raised > eyebrow, or rolling eyes), but given Madam Bones's intense scrutiny > here, indicated by her stare and her readjusted monocle, I suggest > that she's seeing something here beyond the usual "Did you catch > that?" or "yeah, right!" I think he's saying, "I trust that *you* will > look into it as I don't trust Fudge to do so" or something along those > lines. Najwa: That is precisely what I mean when I talk about Dumbledore and Snape telepathically communicating a secret plan during the DD murder scene. I think that they can directly allow certain people to read thoughts and close off their minds to all others who might be trying to intrude. I think that if we go back to certain scenes (i.e. Harry's occlumancy lesson when he actually got to Snape) you might can feel when someone is tapping into your mind or transmitting something to you mentally, sort of like telepathy. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 23 20:39:22 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 20:39:22 -0000 Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152764 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: > > It's hard to explain exactly why objects have a meaning to you if > you're this type of person but yes, they definitely do. (snip) But basically the objects are totems for memory. You > don't want them because they mean something to someone else but > because they mean something to you, something you may or may not be able to explain. Magpies traditionally are thought to like things that are "shiny" (all corvids do) but for people "shiny" can be sort of a metaphor for some kind of inner attractive shine. It doesn't seem like Tom gets pleasure out of playing with the yo-yo or the mouth organ. Usually with this sort of thing the item brings > pleasure just in itself. It's to be taken out when you want to look at it, touch it and "feel" whatever it means, be it a memory or a symbol of something that's connected to yourself. (Snip> > My guess is he might even feel more like the objects are his, not theirs, because they "call" to him in some way that makes them more than a toy or a harmonica. Tonks: Yes, yes. This is what I am getting at. What do they mean to him? We need to get inside his mind. We need to know how he thinks, especially when he was a child. I think that DD wants Harry to do this.. to understand the enemy. Know how he thinks so you can plan how to outsmart him. Come on all you detectives.. what was Tom thinking? Why are those objects important? How do they tie into the Horcruxes that he uses? Does he have any of them now? Has he collected anything else as an adult? Does Slughorn (who collects people) have anything to teach us about hording behaviors that we can use when trying to understand LV? Tonks_op From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 20:58:17 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 20:58:17 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152765 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 16: A Very Frosty Christmas Carol: Thanks for a great summary, SSS, and my apologies for snipping most of your thought-provoking questions to concentrate on this one in particular: > 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape > is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get > information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's > that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's > statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these > years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is > the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the > fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When > is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry > correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? Carol responds: IMO Snape is definitely an actor, and a very good one, or he couldn't be a completely different person to DD than he is to the DEs, or to Harry than he is to Draco, or even to DD than he is to Harry. But unlike Draco, I take the answer to "Where do you think I would have been all these years, if I had not known how to act?" to be "dead." (Draco probably thinks that Snape means Azkaban, but since Snape has been cleared of all charges, I don't think that's the case. In any case, Snape wants Draco to think that the acting involves pretending loyalty to DD; obviously, he can't let Draco know that he's feigning loyalty to LV if that's the case--and I think it is.) The question with regard to this conversation is, when is Snape acting and when is he following natural inclinations that lead to the same goal (which I take to be finding out whatever he can about Draco's activities without giving away his true loyalty)? I think that when Harry says, "Not even Snape is that good an actor," I think he's referring to Snape's statement that he's trying to help Draco. This statement I believe to be absolutely true. Neither boy appreciates the terrible risk that Snape has taken for Draco, putting his life on the line to protect him and even, should it prove necessary, taking the burden of committing a terrible deed away from him. Granted, neither of them knows about the third provision of the vow, but that would make the misinterpretation greater on both their parts because neither of them would understand his motive. (Assuming DDM!Snape, of course, but I've yet to be convinced that either OFH! or ESE!Snape would have put his life on the line for Draco.) To return to the question, IMO, Snape's "acting" here consists of expressing real concern for Draco, a genuine desire to help him, but disguising from Draco (and from Harry, though Snape doesn't know it) exactly what he means by "help." And, yes, absolutely, the grownups (Lupin, Mr. Weasley, and later DD) are right that he's trying to get information from Draco, as even Harry has deduced. (So does Draco, which is why he attempts Occlumency against Snape's "interference.") His acting can't cover his desire for information, but it can cover his reasons for wanting it. And apparently, he succeeds in doing so: Note that Draco calls DD a "stupid old man" for not recognizing Snape as a double agent whose loyalties, so far as he has any, lie with LV. (I personally doubt that Draco is a better judge of character than DD, but we shall see.) Snape has something like a stage presence from the moment we first see him up close in SS?PS "The Potions Master." I think that Adult!Snape has cultivated an image for himself that contrasts dramatically with nerdy, weedy little Teen!Snape, an image that I would describe as one part DD (whom we have also seen sweeping out of a room), one part McGonagall (who can also silence her students simply by walking into a room), and one part Lucius Malfoy (who embodies a certain arrogance also seen in members of the Black family, including Bellatrix and the young Sirius). This image includes cultivated diction, a "silky" voice, theatrical movements, inscrutable expressions, sarcasm, and occasional faint sneers. He does not make a show of his many gifts, including his skill at duelling and the ability to invent spells. Most of the time, it's difficult to guess what he's thinking. At any rate, this usually cool, often sarcastic, sometimes dramatic persona has become habitual to him; he can turn it on for Bellatrix and off again with Narcissa and remain in control throughout the scene (until the hand twitch gives him away). Occlumency is another tool, and IMO he uses it to conceal his thoughts and feelings whenever revealing them might be dangerous even if the person he's with is not a Legilimens. He can usually keep even anger under his control, with notable exceptions relating to MWPP in PoA and OoP and to the death of Dumbledore in HBP. That he does not lose control in the Occlumency lessons (until Harry invades the Pensieve) or when Harry uses a verbal Protego on him in DADA class shows, I think, that he is not out to *get* Harry but to *teach* him. With regard to Draco, IMO the concerned teacher/HoH aspect of his feelings is not feigned. For whatever reason, he cares as much for Draco as DD does for Harry, not to mention that he knows more than Draco does about the danger the boy is facing, and it's very exasperrating to have to deal with a teenager who mistakes this concern, this fear for his favorite student's safety and his very soul, for a desire to "steal" that student's "glory." But Snape has to continue his role as double agent, pretending to be LV's man, trying to extract information without giving his true loyalties away, hinting at his own danger without revealing his full danger or the motives behind it, advising Draco against carelessness and the dangers of expulsion (which, IMO, would mean death for Draco) without revealing that the last thing he wants is for Draco to get close enough to DD to attempt to kill him. BTW, Snape could perhaps have pushed past Draco's crude and easily detected attempt at Occlumency, but even if he has the ability (and we don't know whether he does or not), he could not have done so without alienating Draco further and arousing his suspicions about Snape's loyalties. (LV's man wouldn't interfere with Draco's "plan.") So while I think that, with the exception of Dumbledore, Snape plays to the way in which each person perceives him, whether that person is Harry, Draco, Bellatrix, or Narcissa (using additional measures in the case of LV to shape or reshape that perception), I think that he's usually playing himself, some aspect of the extremely intelligent and talented former teenager now able to control others with a look or a word, suppressing any emotion that will make him look weak, using everything from his natural Slytherin sympathies to his antipathy for MWPP to prevent his cover from slipping. And IMO, he has been almost too successful, so that whenever he does reveal his loyalties, for example throughout the last chapters of GoF, Harry can't accept them as genuine. I'm not saying that Snape doesn't hate Harry, though I don't think it started out that way (I think he was imparting a valuable lesson and testing the Harry-as-Dark-Wizard theory at the same time). What I'm saying is that Snape uses everything, including his own emotions when he chooses to show them, as a cloak to conceal his loyalties from everyone except Dumbledore, the only one in the WW who knew where Snape's loyalties really lie. So, yes, Snape is an actor and a gifted one who would have been dead once Voldemort was restored if he could not lie convincingly, concealing his lies through his superb abilities as an Occlumens. Unfortunately, by the end of HBP, the act is altogether too convincing. Alas for Snape unless Dumbledore's will leaves Harry some bottled memories of his interactions with Snape, including the Prophecy itself, the best plot device I can think of for answering all our Snape-related questions. Carol, wondering who will inherit the Pensieve itself and hoping that it's Aberforth From blink_883 at hotmail.com Tue May 23 18:41:51 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:41:51 -0000 Subject: Noticed Something: Draco's Helpers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152766 bboyminn: > But that raises another issue, how is Draco communicating with people > outside the school. Everything is being closely monitored, so it is > unlikely that he is using Owl Post, and it's unlikely that he is > sneaking out of the school to meet someone at the gate, and he > certainly isn't sneaking off of the school grounds. > > The enchanted coin he uses to contact Rosemerta I think is fine to > control her, but that doesn't explain how he is contacting and > engaging the complex assistance of Death Eaters. He certainly must > have some covert means of communications, but what is it? Of course > the books doesn't tell us, so we are completely in the realm of > speculation, but it seems an important deatail, and it seems a > vulnerability in Hogwart's defenses. > > So, what could it be? > > Two way mirrors ..... > Patronus - We know the Order communicated using their Patronus, but > again we don't know the limitations of that. ...I think it is somewhat implied that the Patronus can carry a short verbal message, but how short or long is unclear. I speculate that you can not carry on a dialog or conversation via Partonus; it's more like email than a telephone. Both of these would be undetectable and unstoppable, although a silvery Patronus form rushing out of the castle might be noticed by someone. Yet, it certainly can't be stopped, which is why the Order uses it. WG: IMO, Two way mirrors it isn't. Draco says he got the coin idea from Hermione, so maybe if Harry had used the mirrors (and Draco seen them etc), we could surmise Draco may have used them. However, this didn't happen, and there could always be something *similar* we don't know about that DE's use to communicate. I don't believe DE or Drace communicate using a patronus. Imagine all those DEs in Azkaban, if they could all cast a patronus? I believe that in order to cast a patronus - a witch or wizard has to have felt a very strong moment/s of love, purer the better. I don't think that DEs have anything that they could feasibly use as 'patronus material'. Furthermore, i always envisaged a patronus carrying a message but it not being verbal - for instance, the patronus is 'sucked' into the recipient's wand and then the recipient hears the message in their ear, or even in their head as a sort of telepathic message. I doubt a patronus would be much use in an emergency, if it didn't ensure the message was a private one. ON THE OTHER HAND! Snape does 'intercept' (even though we don't know how, we know he did!) the message that Tonks sent to Hagrid. How did he intercept it? We find out that Hagrid was only a few minutes late to dinner - was Snape on the lookout for Harry, or something/one else? Or was Tonks so distracted that she made such a basic mistake? If anyone could intercept a patronus message, it wouldn't secure enough! Consider also the amount of effort it took Harry to master the patronus. We know that Draco has been taught Occulmency ("I see Aunt Bellatrix has been teaching you..."HBP - when Harry overhears Snape and Draco talking), and IMO DEs communicate using a combination of Legilimency/or something similar. Harry, IMO, couldn't master Occlumency because he has a 'simple', that is to say un-deceitful, soul and mind - he can't grasp the concept of hiding one's thoughts in such a way. WG* From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 20:33:04 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 16:33:04 EDT Subject: Harry's Fate Message-ID: <38d.3a4370d.31a4cb80@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152767 In a message dated 23/05/2006 20:56:04 GMT Standard Time, wdcaroline at yahoo.ca writes: These are not fairy tales after all, Clare: In my opinion they are reflective of a great many classic british tales, from Masefield's "Box of Delights" to Lewis' "Narnia". Every time I read one of her books I am reminded of at least five others. The children never die in these British classics, the mentor usually does but not always. Fairy Tales, the unfiltered ones, the real ones are horrific - Roald Dahl was closer to the originals than the prissy hokum we are fed nowadays. Cinderella's abusive sisters chopped chunks off their own feet to fit into the glass slipper, Red Riding Hood's grandma was thoroughly digested and Rapunzel's prince was blinded as she stumbled pregnant, unmarried and shorn of all hair through the forest, Goldilocks was originally a fox called Scrapefoot who narrowly avoided being hung or drowned but was swung, battered and thrown from the tower of the castle. Fairy Tales are terrifying and hail from a time when there was no such thing as childhood as we know it, childhood was a brief preparation for entering a world where a girl would be married at 12 or 14 and quickly pregnant (although the working classes would be pregnant first and married after as per the tradition of testing reproductivity that has been squashed in memory by those wonderfully hypocritical Victorians) as she would most likely die before she was 40. Where boys worked from the age of 8 if they were not amongst the extreme minority of the wealthy. It isn't a fairy tale, it is an amalgam British Classic and I believe that she will stick with the tradition of having the kid alive and kicking at the end. It's just an opinion but one informed by a post-grad specialisation in Children's Literature. She'd never get away with killing him anyway, he's too well loved and she's ripped out the hearts of the nation twice already. She has already stated that she will only write 7 and she can ensure that by wrapping up the story; I have no doubt that she is capable of that. She doesn't need to kill the character, that is a television tradition and in literature it doesn't stand, one needs a more legitimate out. Conan Doyle didn't end Holmes story, so he had to bring him back from the depths - killing them off is the cheat's way out and I think better of JKR than that. Besides which, such an ending who screw up several subtexts, including the abused and lonely reaching for a better life. How can the light of Harry's abused child take a dominant position over Tom's abused child if they both die - it suggests a hopelessness that has been absent from JKR's writing so far. smiles, Clare xx From juli17 at aol.com Tue May 23 21:34:18 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 21:34:18 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152768 Alla wrote: > > Lupin, well, do I even have to start? His prospects of ever returning > to teaching were ruined forever by another bastard, who seized the > opportunity and certainly took the most of it. ( Boy, was I glad that > JKR called Snape's action for what it was ? NOT that he had any kids > safety reasons in his mind, when he did it) Julie: No doubt Snape was a bastard for revealing Lupin's true identity, but he didn't ruin Lupin's prospects of ever returning to teaching. Lupin did that himself. Lupin neglected to take his wolfsbane potion, and without the intervention of Sirius might well have killed three students after he transformed. Lupin also kept his knowledge about Sirius's return to Hogwarts from Dumbledore, which might not have been enough for Dumbledore to fire him given Dumbledore's quite forgiving nature. But I think the werewolf incident would have done it. Lupin would have stepped down even if Dumbledore didn't ask him to do so, and even if Snape hadn't revealed his secret (which might well have come out anyway). To repeat again, Snape was being a nasty bastard revealing Lupin's secret, but Lupin has to (and does) take responsibility for his own irresponsibility, so to speak. I think this is part of the reason Lupin doesn't really blame Snape for the loss of his position, because it really wasn't Snape's fault even if Snape took advantage of the situation for his own petty vengeance. Julie, who thinks absolving Lupin of responsibility here is a disservice to Lupin's character. From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 23 21:39:54 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 21:39:54 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption/Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mout In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152769 Alla: > Person who torments his students on the general basis is NOT a good > human being in my book, no matter whether he teaches his students > something or not, because if student learns something in his class, > but at the same time is so hurt in his class, that in my book is just > not worth it. And yes, education means A LOT to me too. Magpie: But that's your preference. Other people, as we see in fandom, don't agree. So they all give a pass to the teachers they prefer. Alla: > > I don't necessarily agree with Lupinlore that nice teachers in the > Potterverse get a pass, unfortunately I would say that they don't so > far, they suffer A LOT IMO. > > Hagrid, who if I may brought in class Hypogriffs because they are > SUPPOSED to be in the program, he just started them earlier, it is > not like he brought the creatures for seventh year students in the > third year class, as far as I remember, gets jerked around by the > little bastard, who did not listen to the warnings, which were given > loudly. Magpie: Well, not exactly. First, leaving aside the factual points about how loudly Hagrid's warnings are given, and just how advanced Hyppogriffs are, Hagrid's problems do not begin or end with Draco being hurt by Buckbeak, or Draco period. For me, needing to blame Draco just shows up Hagrid's own problems. It pushes the authority of the class onto one of the kids because Hagrid can't take it. Every school as a smartmouth, plus probably many students who are worse; Draco's not in every class Hagrid teaches, nor at the root of most of the Trio's anxieties about Hagrid as a teacher. Hagrid's problems as a teacher are apparent, imo, not when Draco gets slashed (as many kids get hurt in classes at Hogwarts, just as many many kids don't listen to directions or get them wrong- something Snape loves to be a jerk about with Harry) but right afterwards, where he shows he wasn't really in control and the class dissolves into kids drifting over the grass fighting over events. They're still having the same fight years later. The worst thing about CoMC for Harry over the years is guilt. He worries what Hagrid will do, he knows even he himself prefers substitutes. He sees the other kids not particularly happy about Hagrid's return in OotP, hears Luna casually say in Ravenclaw he's considered a joke (Draco's not in all these classes). Harry and his friends try to lend their own authority to Hagrid by sometimes actively silencing dissent, but they can't always do that. The kids in the class fight for authority in the absence of trusting Hagrid. That's where I think he and Snape mirror each other sometimes. When the teacher doesn't wear the authority of a teacher, or acts more like a peer, he's responded to as such and the class suffers. Both Hagrid and Snape have times where they flash that weakness in different ways. However, Snape doesn't always have that problem, no matter what students think he's a bastard. Ironically, when Potions does get a substitute in Slughorn Harry himself has a better year since he's lost his worst enemy in the class, he's got the HBP book making him a star and the teacher absolutely adores him, but the other kids...don't. Snape in the past sometimes intentionally angered Harry and his friends or took points, but Slughorn's class possibly has even more resentment simmering in it. Alla: > Lupin, well, do I even have to start? His prospects of ever returning > to teaching were ruined forever by another bastard, who seized the > opportunity and certainly took the most of it. ( Boy, was I glad that > JKR called Snape's action for what it was ? NOT that he had any kids > safety reasons in his mind, when he did it) Magpie: Lupin does not have Hagrid's problems, even with the same class of students. By all accounts he's got the authority that Snape has, while still being a nice guy. He's a great teacher. He loses his job anyway when Snape tells on him, but Lupin himself also accepts blame for it since he did forget to take his Potion and so turned into a werewolf in front of kids. Alla: His first class was great, IMO. He brought superdangerous animals, who were in the programs, but he explained how to behave around them. His confidence was shaken badly. More experienced teacher would not took all of this so close to heart and continued to teach well, I am sure Hagrid will learn. The only thing is IMO carma is pretty good in JKR books for catching up with bastards, so hopefully Snape will get what he deserves at the end. Magpie: Hagrid's first class wasn't that great, since he didn't even get through it--and not due to anything outside what a person in that job would expect. The end merely highlighted all the flaws of the first part. It's three years later and Hagrid is still always talked about in terms of being "sure he'll get better" or "hasn't been so bad lately" by those with enthusiasm for his career. Those without it seem to just put up with him if they can't avoid him. I think at this point he's just another teacher with his characteristic quirks like Trelawney and Binns. I don't believe much in karma as a supernatural thing, especially because I think it could read as very fake, but I do believe in actions and consequences. That's what Hagrid and Snape--less so Lupin, but not entirely--deal with in canon. Hagrid has the troubles his own self naturally brings, as does Snape. We see the things that trouble him as a teacher also showing up outside of class. Hagrid's very consistent that way. It's not the random hand of chance that comes down on either Hagrid or Snape. One can easily see them working towards their own fates. Lupin is the one person suffering from something that is outside of himself-being a werewolf. That, by definition, is out of his control. (Though he takes responsibility for skipping his Potion.) Tonks: Yes, yes. This is what I am getting at. What do they mean to him? We need to get inside his mind. We need to know how he thinks, especially when he was a child. I think that DD wants Harry to do this.. to understand the enemy. Know how he thinks so you can plan how to outsmart him. Come on all you detectives.. what was Tom thinking? Why are those objects important? How do they tie into the Horcruxes that he uses? Does he have any of them now? Has he collected anything else as an adult? Does Slughorn (who collects people) have anything to teach us about hording behaviors that we can use when trying to understand LV? Magpie: Oh! Well, in that case I'd say that first DD wanted Harry to just see that Voldemort did this, because this is the behavior that explains why the pieces of his soul are encased in things that Harry will be able to figure out. It makes sense, psychologically, that he puts things in important places rather than just places that are well-guarded or whatever--which makes for a more interesting horcrux hunt. I'd say that a yo-yo and a mouth organ, to me, would both be very attractive items in an orphanage. They both do things--I'm connecting them to magic in a way, or power. The yo-yo is something that one controls in a way that looks very magical. The control would, I think, be something Tom himself wanted about it. Same thing with the mouth organ. You blow into it and somehow it makes music. I can remember both those things fascinating me as a kid and imagining what it would be like to make them work, flipping around a yo-yo or playing a tune on a harmonica, since one can't really see how they work just by looking at them. It seems like you just have some magical skill that turns something that looks like a solid thing into something kind of amazing. -m From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue May 23 21:48:30 2006 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 21:48:30 -0000 Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152770 Magpie: > > I can't believe I'm going to post about Voldemort because we have > > something in common, but Dumbledore does call him "magpie-like" > > for a reason. That one moment in canon JKR totally got me to > > love Tom Riddle.:-) Jen: Me too! I found that part of Riddle's characterization so compelling. I'm the opposite of a collector myself, a thrower-awayer type (is there a colloquial name for that?). JKR did a great job of presenting the trophies as the one constant throughout Riddle's life and, I think, replacements for relationships. They signified his relationship to Magic as the most important relationship in his life. Magpie: > > It doesn't seem like Tom gets pleasure out of playing with the > > yo-yo or the mouth organ. Usually with this sort of thing the > > item brings pleasure just in itself. It's to be taken out when > > you want to look at it, touch it and "feel" whatever it means, > > be it a memory or a symbol of something that's connected to > >yourself. (Snip> > Tonks: > Yes, yes. This is what I am getting at. What do they mean to him? > We need to get inside his mind. We need to know how he thinks, > especially when he was a child. I think that DD wants Harry to do > this.. to understand the enemy. Know how he thinks so you can plan > how to outsmart him. > > Come on all you detectives.. what was Tom thinking? Why are those > objects important? How do they tie into the Horcruxes that he > uses? Does he have any of them now? Has he collected anything else > as an adult? Jen: Dumbledore thought the objects reminded Tom of particularly unpleasant bits of magic he performed. So the objects were likely connected to the specific magic used in each case and the very fact he was capable of magic at all, which separated him from others and elevated him to superior status. Without much to go on, in my imagination each object was connected to his anger toward the person and what Riddle did magically to get back at them. Like say the thimble was Mrs. Cole's and she wouldn't let him do something he wanted to do, so he caught her unaware when she was darning socks for the kids and got back at her in some way, taking the thimble in the process. At least, that's how the process went when the murders took place, taking an object from the scene of the crime. I also like to think the yo-yo or mouth organ was at the scene of the cave incident, a possession of one of the children he frightened. I think the horcruxes go a step beyond reminding him of specific magic and are more a way to connect himself to the Founders, as Magpie wrote. It's odd that Voldemort spent his whole life trying to separate himself from others and disconnect, but then he has this obsession with the Founders. The only way I can make sense of it is that Riddle actually felt connected to the building of Hogwarts and what it represented rather than the actual people who founded it. It's a magical entity, almost alive in his mind, and infinitely more appealing than actual living, breathing, humans who mess up his plans. Jen R. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 21:57:09 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 21:57:09 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152771 > Julie: > No doubt Snape was a bastard for revealing Lupin's true identity, but > he didn't ruin Lupin's prospects of ever returning to teaching. Lupin > did that himself. Lupin neglected to take his wolfsbane potion, and > without the intervention of Sirius might well have killed three > students after he transformed. Lupin also kept his knowledge about > Sirius's return to Hogwarts from Dumbledore, which might not have been > enough for Dumbledore to fire him given Dumbledore's quite forgiving > nature. But I think the werewolf incident would have done it. Lupin > would have stepped down even if Dumbledore didn't ask him to do so, and > even if Snape hadn't revealed his secret (which might well have come > out anyway). > > To repeat again, Snape was being a nasty bastard revealing Lupin's > secret, but Lupin has to (and does) take responsibility for his own > irresponsibility, so to speak. I think this is part of the reason Lupin > doesn't really blame Snape for the loss of his position, because it > really wasn't Snape's fault even if Snape took advantage of the > situation for his own petty vengeance. > Alla: I am not absolving Lupin of responsibility of forgetting to take the potion. He undoubtedly deserved some kind of punishment for that, but the thing is did he deserve to LOSE his job because of that? I would say no and no again due to the fact that circumstances of that forgetfullness were unique and unlikely to repeat and Lupin is very likely to take more than necessary precautions in order not to forget anymore. I am sure Lupin in his mind punished himself plenty. Did he deserve to go jobless? Not in my book. It is the same as prank, sort of. Did Sirius deserve punishment for what he did? I am sure he did and I can bet you anything ( forgive me my overconfidence :)) that he WAS punished. But was this punishment enough for Snape? Sure it was not, since I doubt that any punishment would have satisfied him. So, Lupin made a mistake, huge one, but did himself "made irreparable damage to his prospects for career in teaching'? Erm, NO WAY. Not in my book. Snape is the one who did and Snape should take full responsbility for that. If Lupin himself thinks that he is too dangerous and wants to resign, which he absolutely tries to convince Harry at the end of PoA, sure I understand poor Remus' angst, disagree with it but understand. But this is NOT Snape business,and that is the main reason I was so very pleased with JKR's answer about Remus returning to teach ( even though I would LOVE for him to return). She called Snape's action for what it really was " doing irreparable damage to Lupin 's prospects for career in teaching", NOT thinking about safety of the kids, or anything like that. Petty vengeancy of the bastard, glad we agree on this one. :) JMO, Alla, whose today thought of appropriate punishment for Snape would be Lupin or Harry saving him from the dementor. From blink_883 at hotmail.com Tue May 23 20:41:41 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 20:41:41 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter as a Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152772 Cacaia: < QUOTE > 1.If he [Harry] was actually placed in Slytherin- would he have become the Harry Potter we have accompanied all the way until book 6 thus far? Would he be enemies with Draco? 2.Would he and Snape still despise one another? 3.And, above all, would he have become infatuated with the Dark Arts and joined sides with Voldermort? In my opinion, he probably would come out a lot "darker" than the Potter who was placed in Gryffindor. I think he would, if not like, at least come to respect Snape and Draco. But, in the end, mainly due to the "prophesy", it is my opinion that he would end up hunting Voldermort down. What do you think? < / > MAMMOTH! Ok..this may take a while, so please bear with! ==D I've added the numbers to help keep things clear, hope you don't mind Cacaia! 1. This comes down to something *more* than just what is in the Harry Potter series. You have to consider whether you believe that the 'nature' of a person is the only thing that shapes an individual's personality, or if it's their environment, or both, and to what extent. Taking into account the importance of choice and love, two continuing themes i've found in the HP series, and themes that would count for a Slytherin just as much as for a Gryffindor (+ all houses for that matter),I believe that Harry would have been 'darker' as you put it, but that he would not have become friends with Draco. Perhaps Harry would have come to despise Draco's arrogance, maybe Draco's family (or at least, the presence of his parents) would make Harry uncomfortable, considering how boastful we know Draco to be. If Harry found out the truth about his parents, as he has done, and before anything *major* happened, then perhaps knowing that his mother *chose* to die for him out of *love* and the hope of protecting him, HArry would get on the straight and narrow - so to speak. 2. Yes - he and Snape, IMO, would still despise each other. I believe this because Snape is more cruel to Harry than needs be, more so than he is to other Gryffindors, and this stems not only from what house he is or Harry himself, but from Snape's past. 3. Maybe. We are talking parallel worlds here, the kind where cybermen could exist (TARDIS, anyone?) and where Ron and Hermione may never have become friends. (Remember, Harry wanted to go and find Hermione, in fact she may have well died that night otherwise - and then what?!) This would be a Harry without the two people in his life who we know have given him so much love, a kind that he had never known before (not to mention the whole Weasley family!!). Without this, he probably would not have felt as strongly about 'Hogwarts as home' as he does. This may have made him a weaker wizard (HBP - we see that a person's emotions can cause problems with their magic.), less able, maybe less willing, to fight Voldy. However, would Voldy even have accepted Harry, knowing that Harry was indirectly the cause of V's (to him) ridicule - the death of that body, and all the power he had started to accumulate (it's undeniable, "those were dark times, Harry - that's from the books and not the films, right? Damn W.Bros!). WG* From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 20:03:24 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 20:03:24 -0000 Subject: Word play RAB and Stubby Boardman In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152773 > > Ceridwen: > If we're going for Quibbler-worthy speculation, then I'm game! How > about trying reverse Spooner on the name? Stubby Boardman - Bubby > Stoardman, Bubby Moardstan, Mubby Stoardban, Munty Soardban... I > can't see anything there, darn it! Though I thought I might have > something with Soardman (Swordman) or Moardstan (Stan Shunpike). > But, alas. *sigh* > > A stubby boardman would also perhaps be a short man who is on the > board at some corporation, bank, or school. Or, he might have lost a > leg, arm or finger and be on a board. Or he might be a short (or one- > legged) surfer, as you said. Or he might be habitually bored. He > might smoke a lot (stubs of cigarettes) or be rich (check stubs), he > might be a sign painter, or a baker rolling out his dough on a > floured board. He could be an actor who treads the boards. > > But, I thought it was Sirius who was supposed to be ol' Stubby, and > speculation changed him into his brother who may have resembled him? > Anyway, with WG's post, I think we could get something Quibbler- > worthy out of all of this, perhaps a special Black edition? > Najwa: I do love those ideas, and you are probably right about it being Sirius. My poor mottled brain, too much to ponder over and not enough answers. I do like the idea about a special Ancient and most Noble House of Black edition to the quibbler. Maybe even start a whole new string of posts on it. I'm game, anyone else? From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 22:01:56 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 22:01:56 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152774 > > > bboyminn wrote: > > > So, my point is that to unbind yourself from a Vow, you must either > > > word the Vow very precisely so that it has a clear end, or you must > > > gather the involved people together and cast the magical unbinding > > Charm. > > > Cacaia's opinion: > Now,as bboyminn has mentioned:I agree that to weasel oneself out of > such a thing as an unbreakable vow, one must use some wordplay. I > think Snape could have gotten out of this one by saying something to > the effect of: "If the Dark Lord wills it, I will carry on with > Draco's task"- as opposed to the flat and simple, "yes" he gave Narcissa. > Najwa: This is true, he has a quick tongue,so I suppose he might have worded it in a way that he can think of that might be able to change how he could react to it, sort of like when we were all kids and someone asks you if what you said was true and you reply "I SWEAR!" and then mumble "that my name is " under your breath. I could see Snape doing something to that effect, only of course in a more mature way and twisting his words so that they sound like he's agreeing but there's a catch that only the quick witted and focused will notice, both of which I fall short of at times. Kudos to you bboyminn for that point, and to you as well cacaia for helping me understand his point better :). However, now I am baffled as to what to think, because I was relying on my theory that DD did this to get Snape and Draco out of harm's way, along with letting Voldie think that he's got dibs on Hogwarts. Hmmm, this is hurting my Snape had to kill Dumbledore for some heroic cause theory...Any Snape fans mind helping me back into thinking he's really a good guy after all again? From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 22:30:06 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 22:30:06 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152775 > Alla: > > I am not absolving Lupin of responsibility of forgetting to take > the potion. He undoubtedly deserved some kind of punishment for > that, but the thing is did he deserve to LOSE his job because of > that? Leslie41: Resoundingly, YES. And I adore Remus Lupin. But his actions (or lack thereof) in PoA show that he's not "responsible" enough to carry on at Hogwarts. The one thing Remus Lupin has to do to prevent death and destruction at Hogwarts is take his wolfsbane. That. One. Thing. Which he doesn't do. Three students almost die as a result, and no matter how preoccupied he was, that's thoroughly inexcusable, in terms of his responsibilities as a teacher. He also doesn't tell DD about Sirius being an animagus, again which could hypothetically have seriously endangered Harry. Snape may have revelled in the fact that there was a reason to get rid of Lupin, but it was his *responsibility* as a teacher at that point to reveal what Lupin was, since it was obvious Lupin was not responsible enough to deal with his lycanthropy. Snape revealed it at the moment that it had become a proven danger to students, NOT before. An example from my own experience: A decade ago one of the professors where I teach brought a gun to school. He never took it out. Just brought it with him. Apparently he felt that one of the other female professors needed some sort of protecting or something. He was fired. So very, very fired. And rightly so. What Lupin did was worse, and Lupin himself knows it, which (as has been said) why he doesn't blame Snape. > Alla: > I would say no and no again due to the fact that circumstances of > that forgetfullness were unique and unlikely to repeat and Lupin > is very likely to take more than necessary precautions in order > not to forget anymore. Leslie41: "Very likely" is not good enough, when one is a werewolf. > Alla: > I am sure Lupin in his mind punished himself plenty. Did he > deserve to go jobless? Not in my book. It's not a matter of "deserving" to go jobless. Lupin doesn't deserve to be jobless. But he's proven that the job for him is not as teacher at Hogwarts, because he made a crucial error in judgement that could have resulted in at least three student deaths. If I did that, I'd be fired. I might not deserve to be jobless, but I'd be fired. > Alla: > But this is NOT Snape business,and that is the main reason I was > so very pleased with JKR's answer about Remus returning to teach ( > even though I would LOVE for him to return). Leslie41: Of course it's Snape's business. Just as it is my business if one of my colleagues does something to endanger the lives of our students. > Alla: > She called Snape's action for what it really was " doing > irreparable damage to Lupin 's prospects for career in teaching", > NOT thinking about safety of the kids, or anything like that. Leslie41: See, it's not either/or. What it comes down to is Snape is able to get vengeance and do his "duty" at the same time. He never fabricates anything about Lupin. He simply reveals the *truth*. If I actually enjoy reporting the abuses of a colleague because I don't happen to like him/her, does that mean it's not my duty to report it? Snape's very happy about Lupin's exit, but that doesn't change the fact that he needed to let out the fact that there was an irresponsible werewolf teaching at Hogwarts. From bjk5377 at verizon.net Tue May 23 19:04:17 2006 From: bjk5377 at verizon.net (Barbara Kraus) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 14:04:17 -0500 (CDT) Subject: DD death Message-ID: <26042009.319271148411057812.JavaMail.root@vms169.mailsrvcs.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152776 Najwa wrote: > I cannot begin to understand why this death was needed, but I >highly doubt he would die in that manner to Snape without there being >a reason, perhaps to let LV think that he can get his way with >Harry and Hogwarts. Ffred: > Not sure if this idea has ever been floated, but what if Dumbledore > chose to be killed in order to save Draco's life? bjk5377: I've not posted here before and just started reading the board about a week ago...so I'm sure this has been discussed in detail. Are we sure DD's dead? When Harry thought he saw a phoenix rise out of the flames around DD's coffin, could that not have been DD? I wonder why he would die to save the life of a death-eater-in-training... From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 22:31:16 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:31:16 EDT Subject: Word play RAB and Stubby Boardman Message-ID: <48e.8f6042.31a4e734@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152777 Ceridwen: > I think we could get something Quibbler- > worthy out of all of this, perhaps a special Black edition? Perhaps you could include "Too Much Butterbeer" - someone's been busy making the fictional reality or perhaps he really truly exists, lol. The following is a link (which will hopefully make it through) to Lastfm, which has a musician named Stubby Boardman listed with the above song. _http://www.last.fm/music/Stubby+Boardman_ (http://www.last.fm/music/Stubby+Boardman) smiles, Clare xx From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 23 22:55:13 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 22:55:13 -0000 Subject: DD death - Vow: Broke and/or Rescinded In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152778 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > > > > bboyminn wrote: > > > > I have to believe that anything that can be done, can be UNdone, > > though with in obvious and reasonable limits. > > > So, my point is that to unbind yourself from a Vow, you must > > either word the Vow very precisely so that it has a clear end, > > or you must gather the involved people together and cast the > > magical unbinding Charm. > > Najwa: > I still think that since it is the UNbreakable Vow that it > probably cannot be broken. If it were breakable then I doubt it > would be titled the way it is titled. So I guess we'll have to > agree to disagree. I think the only way to undo it is for Snape > not to have gone through with it and just died. > bboyminn: True the OATH you swear can not be broken, but that doesn't mean you can't be released from you obligation under the Oath/Vow. That's not the same as breaking the Vow. If Narcissa agree to release Snape from the Vow, then I think they can perform the UNBinding Charm and Snape can be released. So while I agree the Vow itself can not be broken, I do not agree that the Vow can not be rescinded. As long as we are on the subject, let's look at the three Vows - "Will you, Severus, watch over my son, Draco, as he attempts to fulfill the Dark Lord's wishes?" "And will you, to the best of your ability, protect him from harm?" "And, should if prove necesary... if it seems Draco will fail..." whispered Narcissa (Snape's hand twitched within hers, but he did not draw away), "will you carry out the deed that the Dark Lord has ordered Draco to perform?" 1.) '...watch over...as he attempts...', well, that's not too hard or even dangerous, and it really is a vow that can't be broken. All he has to do is 'watch'. 2.) '...to the best of your ability...', now that's certainly a loophole. Again, he only has to do his best, he doesn't have to succeed. 3.) Three points here; a)'should it prove necessary', 'if Draco will fail', b)Snapes hand twitched, c)'carry out the deed'. The above is quoted from another post of mine, but it is very long, so I won't bore everyone with the details. The first two Vows are meaningless, they have a built-in OUT. Snape only has to 'watch' and work 'to the best of his ability'. There are plenty of loophole in the third Vow, but I won't touch on them. For the moment let's just assume the third Vow means what it says. Will you, Snape, carry out the deed that the Dark Lord has ordered Draco to perform? Snape did that, we assume Draco's task was to kill Dumbledore, Draco couldn't to it, so Snape did. It seems that Snape has lived up to the terms of the critical part of the Vow, and since that job is done, he is release from the hold of that commitment. Or, should we assume that Snape bears fatal responsibility for every task the Dark Lord ever assigns Draco in his entire lifetime? The other to commitments are to 'watch over' Draco and 'to the best of his ability' protect Draco. He doesn't have to succeed at either one, only try, and that should satisfy the Vow. Given that the critical part is over with, and the two remaining points are minor, I don't see any reason why Narcissa wouldn't let Snape out of them. She gains very little by keeping them in place, and does gain Snape's gratitude and favor in return for releasing him. If you want to read my entire comments, you can find them in this group, but also at - Theory Points to Snapes Death,... http://www.leakylounge.com/index.php?showtopic=11918&st=10 Though, I will point out that will related, those comments are do not directly address the current subject at hand. Look for the Green Icon and the username 'BlueWizard'. Steve/bboyminn From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue May 23 23:03:46 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 23:03:46 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152779 Alla: > So, Lupin made a mistake, huge one, but did himself "made irreparable > damage to his prospects for career in teaching'? Erm, NO WAY. Not in > my book. Pippin: You've got nothing to lose if your predictions about Lupin's trustworthiness turn out to be ill-founded. Would you stake the lives and futures of other people's children on your confidence in Lupin? Would you like to be accountable to the Slytherin parents if you are wrong? That's the position Snape was in. Rowling did not say that Snape was to blame for exposing Lupin as a werewolf. IMO, blaming Snape is blaming the messenger. Lupin's own actions made his exposure inevitable. Lupin recognized that when he offered his resignation and again when he told Harry that it would have come out anyway. How could Lupin guarantee that it would never happen again except by resigning? If *your* carelessness on the job exposed three children to a life-threatening disease, would you think you deserved to stay on? Knowing that absolutely nothing could be done to make amends if you weren't so lucky next time? Pippin From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 22:53:25 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 22:53:25 -0000 Subject: Ghosts, Horcruxes, The Veil, and Death in the Wizarding World Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152780 Can someone help me grasp a few concepts better, because the more I think about them, the more confused I get. People who die unhappy become ghosts right? Or is it people that are afraid to die become ghosts? If so, then why are there poltergeists like Peeves? Did he die in an angry manner? And if people become ghosts because they are afraid of passing over to the other world, like Sir Nicholas, then horcruxes are there for evil people to make and keep themselves semi-alive? Sirius passed through the veil, and can't come back, however if it's sad people that become ghosts, then surely Lily, James, and DD would have been ghosts for the mere fact that they did not die happily at all. I would think that a whole slew of the wizarding world that died to Voldemort and left things unsettled (i.e. The Dead Members of the Order) would have the urge to come back or something, however I do think it's more that people who are afraid of passing over are the ones that become ghosts. In that case, I don't think Merope would come back as a ghost because she died of a broken heart and not because she was afraid to go, in fact she seemed to give up on life altogether. I'm just confusing myself with the many ways that death effects the Wizarding world. Anyone care to theorize on what sets all these things apart? Najwa From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Tue May 23 22:56:58 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:56:58 EDT Subject: DD death Message-ID: <301.5e6784e.31a4ed3a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152781 bjk5377: >> Are we sure DD's dead? When Harry thought he saw a phoenix rise out of the flames around DD's coffin, could that not have been DD? I wonder why he would die to save the life of a death-eater-in- training... << To respond in reverse order: ...Because Dumbledore doesn't think that anyone is beyond salvation (cite -Snape) and he was in a pretty poor state anyway. As to 'is he dead?' - this one keeps running around my head and won't quit. The circle goes like this: JKR uses English Literature and classical mythology A LOT and there are strong resurrection/surviving death trends in many of these, extending into our "muggle" culture which she also uses. So will he come back to life? It feels so wrong, is it meant to feel wrong and will this be corrected? All precedents of influence upon her writing suggest that he will come back to life BUT it is what would be expected by the intelligent reader and desired by the emotional reader, therefore will she confound these expectations by keeping him dead and making us deal with it. Is death something that we have to deal with to deal with the darkness? People die in fairy tales and in the same stories which set other precedents for predicting her writing, which undermines the precedent and leaves it up in the air. But there is the double bluff and making such a big deal (and big white icy monument) of his death could be distracting us from the fact that she will follow the classic line and keep him around in some way. He drunk the liquid in the horcrux receptacle and had previously made statements about it being a bad idea to split one's soul - bluff? - could the replacement necklace actually be ADs horcrux? But wouldn't that make him bad/tainted etc, so she wouldn't do that. And on and on and on and on because I want him to but I don't want him to because it would be an emotionally pleasant feeling and because it would be an overused lame cop-out literarily, but still my head spins round... No resolution to suggest but the debate comes down to Desire vs. Writing style and if I put my emotions aside...I think he's gone! smiles, Clare xx From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 22:40:56 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 22:40:56 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: <26042009.319271148411057812.JavaMail.root@vms169.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152782 > bjk5377 wrote: > I've not posted here before and just started reading the board about a > week ago...so I'm sure this has been discussed in detail. Are we sure > DD's dead? When Harry thought he saw a phoenix rise out of the flames > around DD's coffin, could that not have been DD? I wonder why he would > die to save the life of a death-eater-in-training... Najwa: Some believe that there is a possibility that Dumbledore is still alive, but I don't think so. He's the classic mentor that has to get out of the way to make way for our hero to do his job as the chosen one. However, he can still communicate through portraits. When you say the phoenix rising out of the coffin being him, are you suggesting he's an animagus in the form of a phoenix? I don't put it past him, but I don't see that happening either. As for saving the life of a death eater in training, remember, wizards and witches have an honor code where if you save their life, they in turn must return the favor in some form. One example is how Wormtail will hopefully help Harry because Harry spared his life in PoA. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 23 22:59:32 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 22:59:32 -0000 Subject: Word play RAB and Stubby Boardman In-Reply-To: <48e.8f6042.31a4e734@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152783 > Ceridwen: > > I think we could get something Quibbler- > > worthy out of all of this, perhaps a special Black edition? Najwa: Here's some wordplay for you: Stubby Boardman == Dobby stun mad RAB Now we could see that as Dobby stunning RAB who became crazy, or perhaps Dobby accidentally stunning RAB and made him mad, or Dobby stunning RAB because he thought that he was a mad man. How's that? Najwa From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 00:38:14 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 00:38:14 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152784 > Pippin: > Rowling did not say that Snape was to blame for exposing Lupin as a werewolf. > IMO, blaming Snape is blaming the messenger. Lupin's own actions > made his exposure inevitable. Lupin recognized that when he offered his > resignation and again when he told Harry that it would have come out anyway. Alla: I am ONLY talking about Snape's actions here and I do disagree. I think the tone of her answer can not be more clear. She does not say that his forgetfullness to drink the potion brought the end to his teaching career. She says "His exposure as werewolf brought irreparable damage to his career in teaching". I'd say this is a very negative evaluation of such action, Pippin. But this is just me of course. What Lupin realised or did not realise IMO has absolutely nothing to do with what Snape did. I find Snape's actions to be disgusting, regardless of what Lupin responsibility is and as I said, I of course do not dispute that Lupin made a mistake, but the punishment Snape chose for him number one has far exceeds the crime IMO and number two was not Snape's business to begin with. But I am of course talking from the position of someone who does not think that Lupin is evil servant of lord Voldemort in deep disguise. :) Pippin: > How could Lupin guarantee that it would never happen again except > by resigning? If *your* carelessness on the job exposed three children to > a life-threatening disease, would you think you deserved to stay on? > Knowing that absolutely nothing could be done to make amends if > you weren't so lucky next time? Alla: I am NOT looking at Lupin's mindset, I am sure poor man was ready to resign the moment he realised what happened. I am just thorougly disgusted by Snape who in my book had the only thing on his mind - revenge. Oh, and of course I wonder how much Lupin's exposure by Snape helped Umbridge to get through her antiwerewolfes legislation. JMO, Alla, who won't be surprised if it turns out that Snape planned to kill Lupin during the Prank night AT ALL. From ldorman at researchbydesign.com Wed May 24 00:44:18 2006 From: ldorman at researchbydesign.com (kibakianakaya) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 00:44:18 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152785 Ken wrote: > I have seen a lot of speculation in various places about whether > Snape is a double, triple, quadrupule, ..., or n-tuple agent and > naturally have engaged in that myself. This exchange gave me a > sudden new (to me) thought: could Snape have been a simple secret > agent all along, Dumbledore's plant in the DE from the beginning? > Could that theory be squared with what we know of Snape's DE > career? It would require that he appear useful to the DE without > committing any real crimes. > > DD would be certain that Snape was not a DE now if he had never > really been one. Or as certain as anyone could be. DD could not > *ever* tell anyone the reason for his trust of Snape if this were > the reason. At the least it would be the end of Snape's role as > spy and it would lead to his instant death if the DE caught him. Lilygale here: I'm also a lurker, but your idea has been taking root in my mind since I read RedHen's arguments that Snape has been DDM since his Hogwarts days. One of her lines of reasoning concerns Trelawney's first prophecy and Snape's overhearing of same. Jodel at Red Hen points out that Trelawney could not have heard Snape being ejected from the Hogs Head halfway through the prophecy, since Sybill is not conscious of her environment while making a true prophecy. Therefore, it is likely that Snape either 1. Heard the whole prophecy but, on Dumbledore's command, told Voldemort only the first half OR 2. Heard none of the prophecy but was summoned by Dumbledore to the Hogs head AFTER the prophecy was made, debriefed, and then gave LV the first half. Snape as "DDM all along" provides a very simple explanation for why Dumbledore trusted him so completely. On the other hand, I do believe that Snape has a long and deep relationship with the Malfoy family. I'm not sure if I believe that Snape and Narcissa had a relationship that was more than friendship (those ACIDPOPs are a bit too sharp for my taste) but Snape seems to have a genuine fondness for Narcissa and Draco that might relate to Lucius and/or Narcissa befriending him during his Hogwarts days. So even as DDM, Snape has a genuine motivation (independent of Dumbledore's motives) for helping Draco and trying to keep his soul intact. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 01:18:47 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 01:18:47 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152786 > Lilygale here: >> Snape as "DDM all along" provides a very simple explanation for why > Dumbledore trusted him so completely. Alla: On the other hand, Snape as DD!M all along provides no explanation for Dumbledore telling Harry that Snape felt remorse after telling the prophecy to Voldemort. Except of course if Dumbledore lying through his teeth here, which I am not ready to accept yet. :) In light of DD withholding the truth from Harry in PS/SS, but also telling him that I will not of course lie, I find Dumbledore as liar even more difficult to accept. JMO, Alla. From celizwh at intergate.com Wed May 24 01:41:20 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 01:41:20 -0000 Subject: Rowling and Snape: was: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152787 Leah: > > I find this answer quite depressing, because it > > makes me feel that JKR's view of Snape is most closer > > to Alla's, than it is to mine or > > Carol's. Leslie41: > It may be, on the surface. But I am of the mind > that deep down, whether she has planned it or not, > Rowling is extremely drawn to Snape, and probably > spends more time thinking about him than any other > character. HBP only reinforced this for me. houyhnhnm: It has to be remembered that a lot Rowling's answers that make some of us queasy (Well me, any way--shaking her finger at girls who like bad boys, then turning around, winking, and smirking, and saying you don't understand women if you think Lily was really mad at James. Calling herself evil and laughing, and so forth) have been given in interviews with young fans who get into the books on a much more elemental level. Or she has been promoting book sales or dodging questions that would give away plot. This is what Rowling said in an interview with a little more gravitas, at Amazon.com.uk ************************* Amazon.co.uk: Are your characters based on people you know? Rowling: Some of them are, but I have to be extremely careful what I say about this. Mostly, real people inspire a character, but once they are inside your head they start turning into something quite different. Professor Snape and Gilderoy Lockhart both started as exaggerated versions of people I've met, but became rather different once I got them on the page. ************************* I like Snape because he never does or says anything trite. The other characters degenerate into caricatures for me at times, but Snape never does. I find it hard to believe that an author could create such a fascinating, three-dimensional character without putting a great deal of herself into him. So I guess it all comes down to how intellectually honest she is. She could make him into a scapegoat, her own sin-eater, if she is not honest. But, really, how could any author create a character who lives in a house filled with books, only to turn him into a two-dimensional baddie with no redeeming qualities at the end. It's monstrous. Isn't going to happen. From aida_costa at hotmail.com Wed May 24 01:13:27 2006 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (nowheregirrrl) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 01:13:27 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152788 Ken: > could Snape have been a simple secret agent all along, Dumbledore's > plant in the DE from the beginning? "nowheregirrrl": You know, I've NEVER even thought of that, and I don't think I've ever come across that theory anywhere else before either. It makes perfect sense though, doesn't it? Of course, now I have to go back and read the books with that idea in the back of my mind. JKR once said in an interview that Snape is 'a deeply horrible person' and I assumed that was the part of his character that made him become a DE. But what if Dumbledore planted him BECAUSE Snape is such a horrible person - he'd be able to participate in DE raids and witness/participate in atrocities without guilt/revulsion/ etc. This all touches on something that not many people want to acknowledge - that Dumbledore can't be all squeaky clean and noble. In every resistance group dirty work has to be done. (Think of the French Resistance in WW2). JKR seems hellbent on portraying him as someone who fights evil using only good, however that isn't very realistic. I realize that these books are children's books, after all, no matter much we all would love them to be otherwise, but NO ONE is all good or all evil - I simply don't believe anyone is beyond redemption and that the 'good duys' are always just and noble. From huntergreen3 at aol.com Wed May 24 02:52:15 2006 From: huntergreen3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 02:52:15 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152789 Pippin wrote: >>>Rowling did not say that Snape was to blame for exposing Lupin as a werewolf. IMO, blaming Snape is blaming the messenger. Lupin's own actions made his exposure inevitable. Lupin recognized that when he offered his resignation and again when he told Harry that it would have come out anyway.<<< Alla replied: >>I am ONLY talking about Snape's actions here and I do disagree. [snip] What Lupin realised or did not realise IMO has absolutely nothing to do with what Snape did. I find Snape's actions to be disgusting, regardless of what Lupin responsibility is and as I said, I of course do not dispute that Lupin made a mistake, but the punishment Snape chose for him number one has far exceeds the crime IMO and number two was not Snape's business to begin with.<< HunterGreen: What punishment would be adequate for the crime? We aren't talking about Draco getting attacked by Buckbeak, a snake appearing in the middle of the dueling club, or even Lockhart accidentally removing all the bones from Harry's arm. This wasn't an 'accident' or a simple mistake. Lupin put Harry, Ron, Hermione (and Snape himself) in extreme danger as a result of his *negligence* (in addition, Snape may have been able to remind him of the full moon or be more apt to protect himself/the kids had they not chosen to keep him out when they left the shack). Lupin's condition is both contagious and extremely dangerous. Parent's fears about a werewolf teacher are somewhat valid, or they are because of Lupin's actions *making* them valid. I will agree with you that Snape "outing" him was most likely based more on anger than anything else, but does it really matter what his motivation was? Snape kept it quiet until Lupin did something irresponsible (he even stayed quiet about it way back when he was a teenager, which must have taken a miracle). At that point, if Lupin did not quit on his own or get fired, Snape *would* have a responsibilty (in some sense) to take matters into his own hands. All it takes is *one time* for Lupin to infect or kill a student, and he didn't even make it a whole school-year without forgetting the potion. If it could happen once, it could happen twice, and that time Sirius may not be on hand to hold Werewolf!Lupin off. Alla: >>Oh, and of course I wonder how much Lupin's exposure by Snape helped Umbridge to get through her antiwerewolfes legislation.<< HunterGreen: In either of those parties helped the legislation, it was Lupin himself. By forgetting his potion and running loose in the forest (an action which allowed Peter to escape as well), he became an example of what can happen if someone hires a werewolf. -HunterGreen/Rebecca (who now wonders why they didn't just stupify Peter rather than shackling him) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 04:03:07 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 04:03:07 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption/Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mout In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152790 > Magpie: > But that's your preference. Other people, as we see in fandom, > don't agree. So they all give a pass to the teachers they prefer. Alla: Sure. >> Magpie: > Hagrid's problems as a teacher are apparent, imo, not when Draco > gets slashed (as many kids get hurt in classes at Hogwarts, just as > many many kids don't listen to directions or get them wrong- > something Snape loves to be a jerk about with Harry) but right > afterwards, where he shows he wasn't really in control and the class > dissolves into kids drifting over the grass fighting over events. > They're still having the same fight years later. The worst thing > about CoMC for Harry over the years is guilt. He worries what > Hagrid will do, he knows even he himself prefers substitutes. He > sees the other kids not particularly happy about Hagrid's return in > OotP, hears Luna casually say in Ravenclaw he's considered a joke > (Draco's not in all these classes). Harry and his friends try to > lend their own authority to Hagrid by sometimes actively silencing > dissent, but they can't always do that. The kids in the class fight > for authority in the absence of trusting Hagrid. That's where I > think he and Snape mirror each other sometimes. When the teacher > doesn't wear the authority of a teacher, or acts more like a peer, > he's responded to as such and the class suffers. Both Hagrid and > Snape have times where they flash that weakness in different ways. Alla: Hmmm, that is an interesting analysis and as I said I am really not disputing that Hagrid had many problems as a teacher, BUT I do believe that you are downplaying the negative influence Draco's incident had upon Hagrid. In the beginning of PoA, Hagrid IS a brand new teacher, no? He has practically no experience and IMO he tries his best to make the class interesting by bringing more advanced creatures, but still those that have to be studied in the same year, so really to me it is not such a big deal, I also think that he gave the warnings loud an clear, IMO of course. In any event, I agree that Hagrid cannot keep class in control and he cannot do it later on too, BUT he suffered enormous stress the FIRST lesson he started teaching - supposedly dear Draco got hurt badly, so very badly and then of course he starts milking his injury for what it is worth in his fire Hagrid and kill Bickbeak. All those incidents that you described occurred ( Luna saying that Hagrid is a joke, etc) after incident on the first lesson and IMO incredibly traumatic year for Hagrid. I would say that what Draco did could undermine Hagrid's efforts to become a better teacher A LOT. IMO, and of course it is just speculation that if Draco's incident would not have happened , Hagrid could become better teacher much faster. Now I am of course not so sure. Oh, and let's not forget that in his youth Hagrid was already framed by dear Tommie and he was completely innocent then, just as he and Buckbeack IMO were now. I would say that it would increase the trauma, which Draco IMO inflicted upon Hagrid by framing him and Buckbeak. I am curious though, what do you mean when you say Snape behaves as their peer? Magpie: > However, Snape doesn't always have that problem, no matter what > students think he's a bastard. Ironically, when Potions does get a > substitute in Slughorn Harry himself has a better year since he's > lost his worst enemy in the class, he's got the HBP book making him > a star and the teacher absolutely adores him, but the other > kids...don't. Snape in the past sometimes intentionally angered > Harry and his friends or took points, but Slughorn's class possibly > has even more resentment simmering in it. Alla: Eh, what do you mean that the other kids are having worst year? You mean those whose Slugghorn did not pick for his club? Is there anybody in Slugghorn class whom he actively hates? I would take teacher's indifference over hatred at any time, personally. > Magpie: > Lupin does not have Hagrid's problems, even with the same class of > students. By all accounts he's got the authority that Snape has, > while still being a nice guy. He's a great teacher. He loses his > job anyway when Snape tells on him, but Lupin himself also accepts > blame for it since he did forget to take his Potion and so turned > into a werewolf in front of kids. Alla: Of course. I mean, give me Lupin at any time as my teacher of choice at Hogwarts, I can add Mcgonagall too to the mix. I bet Dumbledore was amazing teacher too. Alla. From rosieb.juane at sbcglobal.net Wed May 24 03:09:47 2006 From: rosieb.juane at sbcglobal.net (rosie743) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 03:09:47 -0000 Subject: Inconsistencies Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152791 I've been reading posts here for awhile, and have noticed many references to JKR's inattentiveness to the minutia of the WW, for lack of a better term. I've only noticed a few myself, would anyone like to fill me in on the rest? "rosie743" From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue May 23 18:28:14 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:28:14 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152792 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Leslie41: > "Keeping the plot interesting" does not constitute a defense of the > character's actions morally. It's a cop out. > EXACTLY! Which is precisely, IMO, why Dumbledore's reprehensible failure to intervene at the Dursleys or to prevent Snape's abuse of Harry cannot be excused on those grounds -- which it often is. "If DD had restrained the Dursleys the story would be boring." "If DD had restrained Snape the story would be boring." Nonsense! Such an excuse is only a cop out, and in no way gets the "epitome of goodness" out of the hot water his manifold sins of omission have landed him in. Lupinlore From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed May 24 04:23:24 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 04:23:24 -0000 Subject: RAB / Amelia Bones and her murder Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152793 In the process of some detective work regarding RAB, I was considering the possibility of it being Amelia Bones. (Yes, I know we all think that it is Sirius's brother. But I was just checking all leads.) At the Lexicon it says that her middle name was Susan so she can't have been using Amelia as a middle name and something with a R as a first name. BUT I see that she was killed by LV himself. WHY? Why was she so important to be killed by LV himself?? What was he looking for? Did he just want to make a statement that not even the head of the Dept. of Magical Law Enforcement was safe? I tend to think that there was more to it than that. But what? By the way, RAB backwards is BAR. Perhaps it isn't Regulus at all, but someone in the Hogshead or another bar. Aberforth? That doesn't make sense, or course, because DD would have known about it. But it is interesting that is does spell bar. Not that it means anything. One must explore all possibilities and not jump to the obvious conclusions. Thoughts anyone?? Tonks_op From scarah at gmail.com Wed May 24 04:32:48 2006 From: scarah at gmail.com (Scarah) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 21:32:48 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ghosts, Horcruxes, The Veil, and Death in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3202590605232132h6a3e871atf3bab3ac08070e6a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152794 Najwa: > > People who die unhappy become ghosts right? Or is it people that are > afraid to die become ghosts? Sarah: Going off Nick's speech in OOTP, I think it's more the latter than the former. Those who aren't ready and willing to cross over and face "the next great adventure, simply don't. Najwa: > If so, then why are there poltergeists > like Peeves? Did he die in an angry manner? Sarah A poltergeist is different from a ghost. Peeves was never alive. >From jkr.com: "Peeves isn't a ghost; he was never a living person. He is an indestructible spirit of chaos, and solid enough to unscrew chandeliers, throw walking sticks and, yes, chew gum." > Sirius passed through the veil, and can't come back, however if it's > sad people that become ghosts, then surely Lily, James, and DD would > have been ghosts for the mere fact that they did not die happily at > all. Sirius was almost certainly the least happy of the list. But as Nick says, Sirius would never want to trap himself on earth, when he spent so much of his time here being frustrated that he was trapped already. I don't think Lily, James and Dumbledore were happy about dying, but they were all happy in their daily lives weren't they? Dumbledore had his issues certainly, but he's also the one that claimed he sees himself in the Mirror of Erised exactly as he is, only with socks. Lily and James were hiding because of the prophecy, but other than that small detail ;) they really seemed to have everything else going for them. > In that case, I don't think Merope would come back as a ghost because > she died of a broken heart and not because she was afraid to go, in > fact she seemed to give up on life altogether. Right, there was nothing tying her here because she'd given up completely. Even haunting Tom wouldn't be any good anymore. Sarah From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 24 04:58:30 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 04:58:30 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152795 > > Alla: > > I am ONLY talking about Snape's actions here and I do disagree. I > think the tone of her answer can not be more clear. She does not say > that his forgetfullness to drink the potion brought the end to his > teaching career. She says "His exposure as > werewolf brought irreparable damage to his career in teaching". I'd > say this is a very negative evaluation of such action, Pippin. But > this is just me of course. > Pippin: You are blaming the person who reported instead of the person who made the report necessary. Snape was unconscious during Lupin's transformation and escape into the forest, yet Dumbledore knew about it by the time he spoke to Harry in the Hospital Wing. The only person who could have told Dumbledore is that mean old Lupin hater, Sirius Black. And since Snape was not present for that interview, the only way Snape could have learned that Lupin was at large on the grounds was from Dumbledore. Dumbledore also must have told Fudge about it, since we hear that he convinced Fudge that Lupin had not gone out to the shack to help Black. Since Dumbledore only tells people what they need to know, he must have thought that Fudge and Snape needed this information. He had to have known that it wouldn't stay secret. So I think you had better blame Sirius and Dumbledore as well as Snape, if blame is in order for putting the students' safety first. Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed May 24 09:27:56 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 09:27:56 -0000 Subject: Ghosts, Horcruxes, The Veil, and Death in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152796 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Najwa" wrote: > > Can someone help me grasp a few concepts better, because the more I > think about them, the more confused I get. > > People who die unhappy become ghosts right? Or is it people that are > afraid to die become ghosts? ...edited... > > Najwa > bboyminn: Hi, Najwa, thanks for the email. Well, this is based on speculation and general knowledge of ghosts, but I think it is both. Though, it is not quite 'unhappy' people who become ghosts. I think it is people who have some unresolved trama here on earth holding them back. Look at Moaning Myrtle, she died a dark and early death while feeling very low and depressed. I think she stayed behind because she was furious about, what's her name, that Hornby girl who tormented her. Her life was unresolved and unfulfilled, and she blamed ?Hornby for her death and was determined to make her pay. So, yes, unhappiness in a sense, but more unresolved trama. In Nick's case, he was simply afraid of death, afraid of what lay beyond, and chose as he called it, his pale imitation of life instead. Note that Nick also died under extremely tramatic circumstances, forty wacks with a blunt axe that did not completely sever his neck. So, while the circumstances may vary, I think it mostly centers around people who die under very emotionally tramatic circumstances. So, tramatic that they are determine to stay to resolve the trama, as in Myrtle's case, or because they are afraid of death, as in Nick's case. While Sirius, Lily, and James all died under Dramatic circumstances, it really wasn't that Tramatic. I think once the felt the peace and saw the light, they went for it. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From little_scottie6 at hotmail.com Wed May 24 07:58:10 2006 From: little_scottie6 at hotmail.com (Victoria Scott) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 17:58:10 +1000 Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152797 "Tonks" >Well to get us off of our usual topic of "you know who", lets talk >about LV. When DD visited him in the orphanage Tom had taken these >things and was hording them. Does anyone have any ideas what these >objects might mean? "G.C" I have an idea about these items, I had originally just shunned them as meer objects. BUT what we know is that there are still 3 missing Horcrux's. What do you think about these objects being those remaining horcrux's. No-one would suspect them and they could be quite valuable to Voldemort if they are the first things he stole using his powers and he may want to salvage them. It could also make sense that Harry would know what each of these muggle items are seeing as though they wouldn't really be used by wizards (?) Well just a thought. I'm not sure where he would have hid them, but you never know, they may be in the room of requirement with all the other items stashed away right under Harry's nose? What do you all think? G.C. From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 09:28:30 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 02:28:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What did Neville Forget? (was Re: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060524092830.70723.qmail@web53201.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152798 bboyminn: Just one minor point though, Neville was over 2 year old when his parents were attacked. Harry and Neville are only a few days apart in age. Harry was about 16 month old when his parents were attacked, and it was estimated about a year later when Neville's parents were attack. That makes Neville between 2 and 3 years old. So, Neville was reasonably aware at that age. Two to three year olds are usually walking and in crude form talking, so while Neville may not have clear memories of what happened, or the possible existance of a Horcrux, the information could be locked away in him, and he could inadvertently assist Harry in his quest. maria8162001: That is a very point you have there, I guess Neville's forgetfullness/memory is very important. As you have mentioned that Neville might be 2 or 3 when his parents were attacked, it is signicant why they were attacked. At that age, 2 or 3, Neville could have well been walking with stability and talking well like a child of 5 and have a tremendous memory. I bet his memory now have something to do with maybe a curse or that it is blocked for some good reason? I am more inclined to believed that his memory was blocked with a spell by his mother?) so he would not remeber what it is he have seen or ought to remember at that age. I mentioned this as I have a daughter of 3 years old now. She statrted walking at the age of 1 and by 1 1/5 years old she was a strong and stable walker. Aside from that she is a good talker(well she said her first real words at the age of 2.5 mothns and from then on she just kept on developing her words) too and have a very very good memory until now. She remember a lot of things from before she turned 1 and now even when we thought she wasn't listening or paying attention to our conversation she would just come up to us and say the things she heard from us which she heard months ago or a year ago. So if Neville was like my daughter when he was young then he saw and remember something which he is not suppposed to see, which could be a very strong reason for his mother to stop him from remembering it, whatever it is, JMO, of course. One thing I always say to anyone, do not underestimate the capabilities/understanding of the children no matter how young they are. You would be surprised just how much they collect and gather datas from what they see and heard from the adults/everybody and their sorroundings. maria8162001 From maria8162001 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 10:05:45 2006 From: maria8162001 at yahoo.com (Maria Vaerewijck) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 03:05:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060524100545.89502.qmail@web53205.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152799 Tonks: Yes, yes. This is what I am getting at. What do they mean to him? We need to get inside his mind. We need to know how he thinks, especially when he was a child. I think that DD wants Harry to do this.. to understand the enemy. Know how he thinks so you can plan how to outsmart him. maria8162001: Hi Tonks, I will try to give a shot on this, thought I cannot give on all the three. first I would like to try with the yo-yo. In the 16th century(if I'm not mistaken), yo-yo was used as weapon first in the philippines before it became a toy. It was used by filipinos as a weapon to hunt animals. So yo-yo = weapon. And thimble is used by women to push the needle when they make clothes or curtains as well as for thimble knocking, where women would tap the window to announce their presence and during the victorian time it is used by the schoolmistress to knock on the head of unruly pupils. I was also used by the shoe makers to make shoes. It was also used to measure spirits and it has also been used as a love-token. Thimble= parents/family=love. I do not know with the mouth organ but I'm still looking at it. So with the 2 objects you mentioned I have: a weapon -yoyo and a family's love - thimble. With these 2 objects I came up with the conclussions as voldemort is/ will be using the family of his ememies as well as his allies as a weapon to destroy them? Because unlike him everybody has a love one and they all(DE's and non De's) love their family. I would love to have the meaning of the last object to complete my conclusion. Well, that's my 1 cents on these investigation. From greatraven at hotmail.com Wed May 24 13:06:36 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 13:06:36 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152800 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > > Alla: > > > > I am ONLY talking about Snape's actions here and I do disagree. I > > think the tone of her answer can not be more clear. She does not say > > that his forgetfullness to drink the potion brought the end to his > > teaching career. She says "His exposure as > > werewolf brought irreparable damage to his career in teaching". I'd > > say this is a very negative evaluation of such action, Pippin. But > > this is just me of course. > > > > Pippin: > You are blaming the person who reported instead of the person > who made the report necessary. Snape was unconscious during > Lupin's transformation and escape into the forest, yet Dumbledore > knew about it by the time he spoke to Harry in the Hospital Wing. > The only person who could have told Dumbledore is that mean > old Lupin hater, Sirius Black. > > And since Snape was not present for that interview, the only way > Snape could have learned that Lupin was at large on the grounds > was from Dumbledore. Dumbledore also must have told Fudge > about it, since we hear that he convinced Fudge that Lupin > had not gone out to the shack to help Black. > > Since Dumbledore only tells people what they need to know, he > must have thought that Fudge and Snape needed this information. > He had to have known that it wouldn't stay secret. So I think you > had better blame Sirius and Dumbledore as well as Snape, > if blame is in order for putting the students' safety first. > > Pippin Sue here: Whoever we "blame" here - and I'm a Snape fan, I should add, though I wouldn't want him for my science teacher in real life! - I suggest that his behaviour in letting the kids know was unprofessional. I work in the school system myself. If someone has done something that puts the kids at risk, or abuses them, or whatever, you report it to the Principal, NOT gossip about it in class the next day. If, as in this case, the Principal knows, you let him/ her get on with it. I have a few colleagues I am not fond of, but if the kids say, "I don't like Mr So and So," I just tell them that I don't gossip about other staff, even if it's someone I dislike intensely, and change the subject. Of course, he might have decided that that softie DD would let Lupin get away with it yet again, who knows? But he does respect DD and care what he thinks. And this is still unprofessional behaviour. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed May 24 13:58:40 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 13:58:40 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152801 > Alla: > That is why I am totally of the opinion that "nice" ( NOT > necessarily polite, but kind , GOOD to people around you) equals > goodness in the general sense. Potioncat: But it's very easy...or could be easy...to 'act' "nice" while not being at all "good". Barty Crouch Jr, for example. He really manipulated people. Personally, I'd rather be sneered at than manipulated. Snape is incredibly unpleasant, but he's shown that he'll come through when things get tough. Some nice people in the series have not been so loyal. >Alla: > Lupin, well, do I even have to start? His prospects of ever returning > to teaching were ruined forever by another bastard, who seized the > opportunity and certainly took the most of it. ( Boy, was I glad that > JKR called Snape's action for what it was ? NOT that he had any kids > safety reasons in his mind, when he did it) Potioncat: I'm not sure I follow you here. Are you talking about something in canon or from an interview? >Alla: > So, yeah, Hagrid has MANY faults as a teacher, but definitely give me > Hagrid and Lupin ANY time over Snape. Potioncat: Neither Hagrid, nor Snape are good as teachers. DD didn't choose them for them for their teaching ability. We get to see what a different House thinks of Hagrid, and we know the Trio doesn't think he's a good teacher. I wish we knew what the other Houses think of Snape. At least one non-Slytherin student liked Snape's DADA class. If I had to choose between Snape or Slughorn, I'd choose Snape. He knew his students very early in the year. Slughorn still doesn't know Ron's name in March...and he's in class of 12 students. (or is it 10?) Slughorn also isn't quick on the practical side of his topic. i might like Hagrid, but I wouldn't choose him as a teacher. Of course, a school full of teachers who could teach like Lupin would be very nice. >Alla > The only thing is IMO carma is pretty good in JKR books for catching > up with bastards, so hopefully Snape will get what he deserves at the > end. Potioncat: Well, we both agree on that...we both hope Snape will get what he deserves at the end. ;-) (Couldn't resist that one.) From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 24 14:24:09 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:24:09 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152802 > Sue here: > > Whoever we "blame" here - and I'm a Snape fan, I should add, though I wouldn't want him for my science teacher in real life! - I suggest that his behaviour in letting the kids know was unprofessional. Pippin: It wouldn't be unprofessional if Lupin wasn't a teacher any longer. Lupin "[r]esigned firs' thing this mornin'." Snape made his announcement at breakfast. Lupin himself does something similar by returning the Marauders Map to Harry. He doesn't consider himself bound by professional ethics because he's not a teacher any more. The chronology is unstated, nevertheless it couldn't be 'first thing in the morning' if Lupin had waited until he heard the gossip before resigning. He doesn't say that the gossip persuaded him. He says the reverse, that after what happened last night, he saw the point of people who wouldn't want him teaching their children, though the owls won't start arriving till tomorrow. Fudge had already been told that Lupin had been on the grounds. Though I'm sure this was the only thing that convinced Fudge that Lupin couldn't have helped Black escape, it wouldn't give Fudge any reason to continue allowing this particular werewolf to go on working at Hogwarts. Lupin was right to think his exposure was inevitable. BTW, in GoF, Fudge declares that he's let Dumbledore "hire werewolves." Is Fudge exaggerating, or does anyone think there's another werewolf on the staff? It'd have to be one of the professors Harry doesn't have. It's sad that many of the people who wouldn't want Lupin teaching their children wouldn't care whether he was safe around them or not, but we are still talking about a teacher who had to be physically restrained by another adult from attacking three students. Whatever you want to say about Snape, no adult in canon has ever thought he was endangering a student's life. Pippin From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 14:31:41 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:31:41 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152803 > > Alla: > > > That is why I am totally of the opinion that "nice" ( NOT > > necessarily polite, but kind , GOOD to people around you) equals > > goodness in the general sense. > > Potioncat: > But it's very easy...or could be easy...to 'act' "nice" while not > being at all "good". Barty Crouch Jr, for example. He really > manipulated people. Personally, I'd rather be sneered at than > manipulated. > > Snape is incredibly unpleasant, but he's shown that he'll come > through when things get tough. Some nice people in the series have > not been so loyal. Leslie41: Yes, exactly. "Nice" is defined as "pleasant or pleasing or agreeable in nature or appearance". Snape's not "nice". He's most definitely unpleasant and disagreeable. But the word "nice" has little meaning in a moral sense. One can be very "nice" and not be good at all. For example: I'm sure that if I met George Bush he'd be very "nice". Amiable, friendly, pleasant. Etc. etc. etc. But that wouldn't convince me in the slightest that he's "good". All politicians aim to present themselves, at least in part, as "nice". And they're always "nice" when you meet them. But who among them is really "good"? That's an entirely different story. "Nice" is easy. "Good" is hard. From whtwitch91 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 14:36:38 2006 From: whtwitch91 at yahoo.com (whtwitch91) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:36:38 -0000 Subject: Math Question: Horcruxes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152804 pforpavati said: You may be on to something here. I have always assumed that Voldemort made the horcruxes in the order in which he acquired them. He had the diary first, the ring second, the cup and locket next. He put his sixteen year old self in the diary. But that may have been a different spell than the one that actually created the horcruxes. We do have a tip off in the books. When Harry first sees him in the pensieve as a boy and later as an adult Voldemort shows no sign of deterioration in his face. A ten year period passes before Voldemort again shows up in DD's office to apply for a job. Then the physical deterioation shows. "His face was burned, blurred..." He hasn't yet reached the total deterioration that is evident from the time only his head shows when he was attached to the back of Quirrel's head. I think that no horcruxes were made until that ten year period when he disappeared from sight and went on a search for the darkest of spells. That's whn he found out how to do it. We know that he made at least one more after he rose to power because his appearance changed. What we don't know is whether his appearance changed from the time he went to Godric's Hollow to the time he reappeared with Quirrel. That would answer the burning question of whether Harry himself is a horcrux. But this does answer the question about the snake. From the time of Quirrel to the time in OotP his appearance did not degrade: he did not make a horcrux in the snake. At least up to that point. And what reason would he have at this point to do it? There are a number of interesting little facets of information contained in the books surrounding this issue and we can only conjecture about their meaning. Jo may never resolve them. Another issue this brings up is whether Voldemort himself knows Harry is a horcrux (if, that is, Harry is indeed a horcrux. Does he have access to a mirror? Would he have the cold nerve to look in it and not throw up? Perhaps he likes the look. Speculate! All my opinion, of course. Sue From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 14:51:25 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:51:25 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Snape WAS: Re: Hagrid and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152805 > > Sue here: > > > > Whoever we "blame" here - and I'm a Snape fan, I should add, though > I wouldn't want him for my science teacher in real life! - I suggest that > his behaviour in letting the kids know was unprofessional. > > Pippin: > It wouldn't be unprofessional if Lupin wasn't a teacher any longer. > Lupin "[r]esigned firs' thing this mornin'." Snape made his announcement > at breakfast. > Lanval: Excellent! Because that throws the argument "Snape was deeply concerned about the students's safety, therefore he saw no other way but to let Lupin's secret slip at the breakfast table" right out the window. We are left, then, with the conclusion that Snape outing Lupin, knowing that he had already resigned, was nothing but pure malice. Pippin: > The chronology is unstated, nevertheless it couldn't be 'first thing in > the morning' if Lupin had waited until he heard the gossip > before resigning. He doesn't say that the gossip persuaded him. > He says the reverse, that after what happened last night, he saw the > point of people who wouldn't want him teaching their children, > though the owls won't start arriving till tomorrow. Lanval: Right, and I'm inclined to believe Lupin. This would also put a stop to an argument I recall coming across before, that Lupin wasn't contrite about what happened, that he was reluctant to accept responsibility, and would never have resigned, had Snape not taken righteous action... From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 24 15:17:57 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:17:57 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption/Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mout In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152806 > Alla: > > Hmmm, that is an interesting analysis and as I said I am really not > disputing that Hagrid had many problems as a teacher, BUT I do > believe that you are downplaying the negative influence Draco's > incident had upon Hagrid. In the beginning of PoA, Hagrid IS a brand > new teacher, no? He has practically no experience and IMO he tries > his best to make the class interesting by bringing more advanced > creatures, but still those that have to be studied in the same year, > so really to me it is not such a big deal, I also think that he gave > the warnings loud an clear, IMO of course. > > In any event, I agree that Hagrid cannot keep class in control and > he cannot do it later on too, BUT he suffered enormous stress the > FIRST lesson he started teaching - supposedly dear Draco got hurt > badly, so very badly and then of course he starts milking his injury > for what it is worth in his fire Hagrid and kill Bickbeak. > > All those incidents that you described occurred ( Luna saying that > Hagrid is a joke, etc) after incident on the first lesson and IMO > incredibly traumatic year for Hagrid. I would say that what Draco > did could undermine Hagrid's efforts to become a better teacher A > LOT. > > IMO, and of course it is just speculation that if Draco's incident > would not have happened , Hagrid could become better teacher much > faster. > > Now I am of course not so sure. > > Oh, and let's not forget that in his youth Hagrid was already framed > by dear Tommie and he was completely innocent then, just as he and > Buckbeack IMO were now. I would say that it would increase the > trauma, which Draco IMO inflicted upon Hagrid by framing him and > Buckbeak. > > I am curious though, what do you mean when you say Snape behaves as > their peer? Magpie: Okay, let me try to explain what I mean. First in terms of behaving as a peer I mean anytime when the teacher sort of gives up what should be the objective place of a teacher and fights dirty. Snape does this with Harry. If I were in his class I would feel uncomfortable when he picked on Harry not just because it's cruel but because it should be beneath him as a teacher. He's not supposed to interact with kids on that level in class and get personally ruffled. When he does that, to me, he shows a weakness as a teacher. Now, to get back to Hagrid, JKR has I think implied that one of the reasons Snape teaches in her fictional school is that kids have to learn to deal with people like him who exist in the world. In Potions class the kids aren't just learning Potions but a social/personal lesson about dealing with a person in authority who is abusing it, or just a person in authority who is demanding and sarcastic etc. Hagrid, imo, teaches the same kind of personal lesson--and he teaches it inside class as well as outside, and he began teaching it before he ever became a teacher. It has nothing to do with Malfoy or a lack of confidence. I really can't imagine him being any different if that first class hadn't happened. Hagrid on one hand has a lot of good qualities. He's also got a sort of amazing ability to tame wild animals etc. DD says he'd trust Hagrid with his life and I believe he means that within the context that he is saying it. However, Hagrid is also a comic character because in some ways he's like a big kid. He's interested in what he's interested in, and often can't really see the big picture. Part of knowing him, as an adult, is making allowances for this, which is why Hagrid is often treated as if he's younger than characters younger than he is. Charlie Weasley sternly tells Hagrid he's got the dragon eggs counted, for instance, years after Hagrid already got into trouble with a dragon. Harry himself has also accepted this aspect of Hagrid. All the Trio know that Hagrid has certain limitations they have to work around or defend or put up with. As a teacher what this translates to is that in his class the kids learn to look out for themselves--I don't think it's OOC for DD to see it that way if he thinks Snape's behavior is a learning experience. The class is too dangerous at most times for Hagrid's being a "joke" to mean it's a complete blow-off. He's a lesson that sometimes you're going to be in a situation like that and the kids have to learn it. Years after the Buckbeak incident Malfoy is still mouthing off, but he's also very jumpy and making sure he hears all the directions--after all, the outcome of PoA no matter what threats he made is that he's still in this class and Hagrid is still Hagrid. When he asks about the safety of the Thestrals, Hagrid is not at all reassuring. When Hagrid teaches he's the same guy he is when he's not teaching, and the kids all get that and react accordingly. Harry himself loves Hagrid and respects things about him, but he still knows he sometimes has to deal with him as a child. Hagrid hasn't changed one way or the other since he started teaching and I really don't think he will, because changing Hagrid in this way would be changing the essence of Hagrid. But he fits right into the teaching staff of Hogwarts. Had Harry never known Hagrid outside of class he could easily have shown up as the CoMC teacher in third year and be funny, the joke being that CoMC is the class where you might get killed because the teacher, well-meaning as he seems, is on the monster's side. Mostly Harry's very open about his personal affection for Hagrid being the reason he wants him teaching. > Alla: > > Eh, what do you mean that the other kids are having worst year? You > mean those whose Slugghorn did not pick for his club? > > Is there anybody in Slugghorn class whom he actively hates? I would > take teacher's indifference over hatred at any time, personally. Magpie: I'm saying that the substitution of Slughorn is very different than the substitution of Grubbly-Plank. It's not like he's any sort of disaster where the kids are dying to have Snape back, but it seems like there are definitely times where kids could prefer Snape (and not just Slytherins). Snape has students he doesn't like; Slughorn barely disguises his favoritism and a student not in his Slug Club has good reason to think he might not even exist in his class. It goes a little further than just indifference, I think. He's another person kids might have to deal with in real life. -m From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 15:13:59 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:13:59 -0000 Subject: Inconsistencies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152807 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rosie743" wrote: > > I've been reading posts here for awhile, and have noticed many > references to JKR's inattentiveness to the minutia of the WW, for > lack of a better term. I've only noticed a few myself, would anyone > like to fill me in on the rest? > > "rosie743" > ....Lupinlore cracks knuckles.... Well, that is certainly an interesting question. I guess inconsistency relates to two different areas: inconsistency of CHARACTER and inconsistency of WORLD. Character inconsistency means that characters behave in ways at odds with the message about them JKR is trying to send. World inconsistency relates to fundamental problems with the internal logic of the world JKR presents. I think you mean the latter. Here are a few examples: 1) Numbers. JKR is really, really bad at math. For instance, no matter how you look at it, Hogwarts is the wrong size. She says that Hogwarts has 1000 students. Yet all the evidence we have from the statements of the hat and the size of Harry's Gryffindor class is that the school has about 280 students. Where are the other 700? Hogwarts doesn't even have the teaching staff necessary to support 1000 students. Snape would have to spend about 80 hours a week in teaching and related duties alone, not counting whatever else he does for DD. No wonder the poor darling's so cranky. Maybe all the teachers have time turners. On the other hand, 1000 students is nowhere big enough for a wizarding world of the size and complexity that JKR presents. True, there are people like Stan Shunpike, and wizarding lifespan has to be taken into account. Yet the latter actually makes things worse if you assume a wizard male remains fertile for the same proportion of his life as a muggle male. One wizard could easily outlive three muggle wives, having a full family with each. 2) Secrecy. The wizarding world is a well-kept secret, yet most wizards are half bloods or muggle borns with close relatives who would have at least some inkling of the WW. By some estimates half the muggle population should have at least a suspicion concerning the WW. In addition, there are embittered squibs who have no advantage in keeping the wizards' secrets. Not to mention all the problems of parents sending kids off to a school they evidently aren't allowed to visit, and kids dropping off the radar screens of the educational and social welfare systems. 3) Acquiescance. Most wizards are muggle born or half blood, which means they are used to the modern world. Yet they acquiesce without demure to a world that is at the very least Victorian? And so do their parents? 4) Wizarding abilities. Wizards have all sorts of powers and abilities that seem to wax and wane according to the needs of the plot. Veritaserum and Legilemency mean that what happened to Sirius should have been impossible. The ability to apparate means that the Potters should have easily escaped from Voldemort. When presented with these problems, JKR has tended to hem and haw and say, in effect, "there are things about magic I haven't told you." Not good. Not good at all. 5) Time. Funny things happen to time in the Potterverse. The first of September comes on the same day of the week every year. What was Snape doing with all that missing time at the end of OOTP? And the speed of owls shifts amazingly according to plot needs. Hedwig takes some time to deliver messages to Lupin and Sirius from Hogwarts, but earlier in the same book Owls make it from London to Privet Drive so fast they would have to be traveling faster than the speed of sound. 6) General Wizard Stupidity. Wizards really are an amazingly stupid bunch. They have magic at their fingertips, yet instead of making life more efficient, they make it LESS so. OWLS are the best way to send messages? Simple cell phones are easier to use and more efficient -- everything in OOTP could have been avoided if Sirius had carried one. Harry is protected at Privet Drive so the Death Eaters never thought to pull a row of lockers down on his head while he was at school? The DEs in the MoM forgot, when faced with a bunch of teenagers, both that they could apparate (i.e. place themselves behind their opponents once the kids moved away from the shelves) and that they could use unforgivables? Voldemort needs the prophecy, and forgets he can apparate into the ministry and take it down himself at any time? Voldy wants to kidnap Harry, so he arranges for Harry to be the very CENTER of attention in GoF? These are some beginning points. Lupinlore From aida_costa at hotmail.com Wed May 24 06:11:50 2006 From: aida_costa at hotmail.com (nowheregirrrl) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 06:11:50 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152808 Lilygale: >since I read RedHen's arguments that Snape has been DDM since his >Hogwarts days. One of her lines of reasoning concerns Trelawney's >first prophecy and Snape's overhearing of same. Jodel at Red Hen >points out that Trelawney could not have heard Snape being ejected >from the Hogs Head halfway through the prophecy, since Sybill is not >conscious of her environment while making a true prophecy. >Therefore, it is likely that Snape either >1. Heard the whole prophecy but, on Dumbledore's command, told >Voldemort only the first half OR >2. Heard none of the prophecy but was summoned by Dumbledore to the >Hogs head AFTER the prophecy was made, debriefed, and then gave LV >the first half. >Snape as "DDM all along" provides a very simple explanation for why >Dumbledore trusted him so completely. Alla: >On the other hand, Snape as DD!M all along provides no explanation >for Dumbledore telling Harry that Snape felt remorse after telling >the prophecy to Voldemort. Except of course if Dumbledore lying >through his teeth here, which I am not ready to accept yet. :) >In light of DD withholding the truth from Harry in PS/SS, but also >telling him that I will not of course lie, I find Dumbledore as liar >even more difficult to accept. I forgot about the Red Hen essays. Yes, it absolutely makes sense to me that Snape was DDM from the beginning. Regarding DD not lying, there is another fantastic Ren Hen essay that touches on this. The link is: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Loyaulte.html The three instances Jodel points out: 1. The Marietta Edgecombe incident. DD tells the Aurors and Ministry people that HE organized Dumbledore's Army. 2. The prophesy being overheard (see Lilygale's comment above). Of course he lied to Harry as DD knew Voldemort was sharing Harry's brain for most of that year. DD couldn't tell Harry anything about Snape other than the DD and SS cover story that they've been telling for years. 3. Snape's remorse regarding the Potter's deaths. Of course he felt remorse, just as DD did. But DD insinuates Snape's remorse made him turn. That's likely a lie. Snape was already DDM. To quote Jodel: "And is it really all that much of a stretch to believe that Albus just didn't quite think that Harry had the maturity to be trusted with the whole story yet?" nowheregirrrl From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Wed May 24 15:44:29 2006 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:44:29 -0000 Subject: RAB / Amelia Bones and her murder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152809 ---"Tonks" wrote: (snipped) > > I see that she (Amelia Bones) was killed by LV himself. WHY? Why was she so > important to be killed by LV himself?? What was he looking for? > Did he just want to make a statement that not even the head of the > Dept. of Magical Law Enforcement was safe? I tend to think that > there was more to it than that. But what? > > Thoughts anyone?? > > Tonks_op > ~aussie~ Amelia Bones' death was a piece in a much bigger picture. One that included Hepizbah Smith and James Potter as having pure blood lines from the founders of Hogwarts. His search for other wizarding heirs may be a motive for kidnapping of Florean Fortescue (HBP 6), provider of ice-cream sundeas and ADVICE ABOUT MEDIEVAL WITCHCRAFT to Harry (POA 4). He may be reknown a history expert and easier to grab than Professor Binns (not only because he is in Hogwarts, but also because it is hard to grab a ghost). (Lexicon also says a Fortescue was a past Heeadmaster of Hogwarts - OOP 27) I think LV is not on a quest that started from Tom Riddle, but a Dark Wizard quest inherited through the ages. I have some rough ideas it may extend back as far as Salazar Slytherin himself. (The Basalisk may not have been the only thing of SS locked in the Chamber of Secrets for centuries, known only in rumours to even Professor Binns.) It was the 3 other founders unity in accepting Muggle-born to study at Hogwarts that drove Slytherin away. With those heirs gone, Salazar's heir can try to reclaim the school for pure bloods. ~aussie~ From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Wed May 24 16:30:15 2006 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:30:15 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption/Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mout In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152810 "sistermagpie" wrote: Snip) > > > > Alla: > > > > I am really not > > disputing that Hagrid had many problems as a teacher, ... IMO he tries > > his best to make the class interesting by bringing more advanced > > creatures, ... I also think that he gave > > the warnings loud an clear, IMO of course. > > > > In any event, I agree that Hagrid cannot keep class in control > > ... ( Luna saying that > > Hagrid is a joke, etc) after incident on the first lesson and IMO > > incredibly traumatic year for Hagrid. I would say that what Draco > > did could undermine Hagrid ... > > > > Oh, and let's not forget that in his youth Hagrid was already > framed > > by dear Tommie and he was completely innocent then, just as he and > > Buckbeack IMO were now. I would say that it would increase the > > trauma, which Draco IMO inflicted upon Hagrid by framing him and > > Buckbeak. > > > > Magpie: (snip) > Now, to get back to Hagrid, ... Hagrid, imo, teaches ...kind of personal > lesson--and he teaches it inside class as well as outside, and he > began teaching it before he ever became a teacher. ... > > Hagrid on one hand has a lot of good qualities. He's also got a sort > of amazing ability to tame wild animals etc. DD says he'd trust > Hagrid with his life ... However, Hagrid is also a comic character > because in some ways he's like a big kid. ...Part of knowing > him, as an adult, is making allowances for this, which is > why Hagrid is often treated as if he's younger than characters > younger than he is. Charlie Weasley sternly tells Hagrid he's got > the dragon eggs counted, for instance, years after Hagrid already > got into trouble with a dragon. Harry himself has also accepted > this aspect of Hagrid. All the Trio know that Hagrid has certain > limitations they have to work around or defend or put up with. > > As a teacher what this translates to is that in his class the kids > learn to look out for themselves--... When he asks about the > safety of the Thestrals, Hagrid is not at all reassuring. > > When Hagrid teaches he's the same guy he is when he's not teaching, > and the kids all get that and react accordingly. Harry himself > loves Hagrid and respects things about him, but he still knows he > sometimes has to deal with him as a child. Hagrid hasn't changed > one way or the other since he started teaching and I really don't > think he will, because changing Hagrid in this way would be changing > the essence of Hagrid. But he fits right into the teaching staff of > Hogwarts. ~now aussie/norbertsmummy~ The MOM also respects Hagrid. When they wanted to send a squad of Aurors to guard Harry in Diagon Alley, they accepted DD's word that Hagrid would be enough. I wonder strongly what makes Hagrid, not just nice, but impervious to spells and hexes. It is not just the supposed Giant's blood as Hermione says. The Giants in France were intimidated by wand weilding wizards.(OOP 20) Delores Umbridge and a small group of Aurors knocked out McGonagall but couldn't stop Hagrid. The escaping DE couldn't stop Hagrid, so turned their attacks to Hagrids hut with Fang still inside. I think either DD gave Hagrid an extra type of protective barrier or his clothing has Graphorn hide in it (Fantastic Beasts) which repells spells. Whatever makes Hagrid virtually bullet-proof, this also makes him think it is natural for others to be as safe as he around the Forbidden Forrest, etc. His mode of trasport to get Harry from the Dursleys and disappear at Kings Cross station is a mystery to me. He said he Flew to that hut on the rock (Thestrall? Flying Carpet?) or what do you think? ~aussie / Norbertsmummy~ From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 15:19:04 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:19:04 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152811 Leslie41: > > Yes, exactly. "Nice" is defined as "pleasant or pleasing or > agreeable in nature or appearance". Snape's not "nice". He's > most definitely unpleasant and disagreeable. But the word "nice" > has little meaning in a moral sense. One can be very "nice" and > not be good at all. And therein is the problem, because many of us simply don't agree that "nice" and "good" are not the same thing. Or let me put it another way -- one can be nice without being good. However, I really don't think it's possible to be good without being nice. And that is where the question of whether Snape can ever be admirable or deserve to be praised comes in, doesn't it? I would say most definitely NO. Because, you see, I think some of use do hold that nice VERY DEFINITELY has meaning in the moral sense. And a person who abuses children simply can never be seen as good, or admirable, or worthy of praise. And thus we stand on the bridge, with one side saying passionately "nice is not the same thing as good" and the others of us saying with unmovable firmness "oh yes it most certainly is." Lupinlore From M.Ros at umail.LeidenUniv.nl Wed May 24 15:45:45 2006 From: M.Ros at umail.LeidenUniv.nl (marionrosnl) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:45:45 -0000 Subject: Nice versus good, was: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152812 Hi, newbie here. It always amazes me that so many people like Lupin because he is 'nice'. I abhorr the man *because* he is 'nice'. Remus Lupin is always kind, polite, politically correct, always prepared to find excuses for people's behaviour and so *nice* it scares me. The man is so *fake* it hurts! He never shows what he feels, truly feels. He never get angry, never shouts at people, even when confronted with Pettigrew (finding out after twelve years that the friend he supposedly mourned was a traitor and the friend he condemned to Azkaban was innocent) he keeps his cool and shows no great emotion. He's so eventempered that it is subhuman. But for all his 'niceness' (or perhaps because of it) he is also incredibly manipulative: he knows how to win people and how to piss off those he dislikes in such a way that he *still* looks nice (that BoggartSnape incident was no accident, I tell you). Passive-agressive one might say. Practically dissolve-into-the-background bland-natured. I don't trust people like that. Because they are slumbering volcanos. Everybody thinks they're harmless little hills. Until the lava erupts. In fact, a couple of weeks ago I when I browsed through the public library, uneasy because I couldn't put my finger on why I was so suspicious about Remus Lupin I stumbled across Agatha Christies' 'Death Comes In The End' (I think it is called - it's the one that takes place in Ancient Egypt) and it all clicked. In that book a family is nice, and kind and peaceful. Until the father brings home a new, unpopular wife. Soon, things fall apart and the first few murders happen. And then it turns out that the family members aren't all so nice and kind and peaceful. They all have a less-than-wonderful side to them that floats on top, now that their lives are in turmoil. Except for one: the ever-so-kind, stable, but boring brother. He *stays* kind and stable and boring. And of course, he turns out to be the killer. Then it hit me: I knew why Lupin makes my teeth set on edge. He's *too* kind and eventempered. Yes, he has a passive-agressive side, a manipulative side, but it is overshadowed with a blanket of... *niceness*... that makes me suspiceous. Give me Severus Snape any day. He might not wear all his emotions on his sleeve (indeed we see only his anger and disdain, and those might well be there because, as an occlumens, he needs to mask his more subtle emotions. Not to say that the anger and disdain aren't genuine - they are) but he is at least honest in his dislike and disdain. He will not 'play nice' and then embarrass you in front of the whole school ('whoopsie, who'd have thought that Neville Longbottom's boggart would be you, Snape'). He might embarrass you in front of the whole school, but he won't be 'nice' about it. I *like* that. Snape is not nice, but he *is* honest about it. Lupin lies. Yes, he does. The first thing that springs to mind in the Shrieking Shack when he tells Harry that Snape hated James because James was better at Quidditch ("probably jealous"). Wtf?! Quidditch? Jealous?! Then he goes on about how ashamed he is for deceiving Dumbledore as a student. He had given his solemn word that he'd lock himself up in the Shack when a werewolf but he breaks that vow to cavort with his animagi friends (and let's hope they never met a human during those 'outings' because werewolfLupin would have ripped him apart) So ashamed he was of breaking his vow that, when returned in an responsible position as teacher, he will keep quiet, let a presumed murderer roam loose amongst his charges (remember the slashed painting and Sirius looming over Ron with a knife?), he intercepts a magic map (which might have shown the Headmaster the whereabouts of the assumed massmurderer), breaks yet again a vow to the Headmaster (that he drink his Wolfsbane Potion and stay indoors on full moon nights) and when he tells us that he is ashamed, he is ashamed for all the *wrong* reasons. He was ashamed of his childhood actions because he broke his word, NOT because he put others into mortal danger. The man is bloody *dangerous*! Far more dangerous than Fenrir Greyback (yes, I know some people will gag at this). He is so bloody dangerous *because* he is so nice! He is so nice, you'd hire him as a babysitter. And then he'll 'forget' his potion and eat your baby. But you'll forgive him, you'll forgive him *anything*, because he is so *nice*. In the immortal words of Stephen Sondheim (from the musical 'Into the Woods'): [LITTLE RED RIDING HOOD after the encounter with the Wolf]: Mother said, "Straight ahead," Not to delay or be misled. I should have heeded Her advice... But he seemed so nice. And I know things now, Many valuable things, That I hadn't known before: Do not put your faith In a cape and a hood, They will not protect you The way that they should. And take extra care with strangers, Even flowers have their dangers. And though scary is exciting, Nice is different than good. Lupin might be nice, but he's far from good! Marion From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed May 24 16:44:50 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:44:50 -0000 Subject: Math Question: Horcruxes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152813 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "whtwitch91" wrote: I have always assumed that > Voldemort made the horcruxes in the order in which he acquired > them. He had the diary first, the ring second, the cup and locket > next. He put his sixteen year old self in the diary. But that may have been a different spell than the one that actually created the horcruxes. We do have a tip off in the books. When Harry first sees him in the pensieve as a boy and later as an adult Voldemort shows no sign of deterioration in his face. A ten year period passes before Voldemort again shows up in DD's office to apply for a job. Then the physical deterioation shows. "His face was burned, blurred..." He hasn't yet reached the total deterioration that is evident from the time only his head shows when he was attached to the back of Quirrel's head. I think that no horcruxes were made until that ten year period when he disappeared from sight and went on a search for the darkest of spells. That's whn he found out how to do it. > Tonks: Hummm... you may be right. Let's look at the facts from the books. I can't tell you the exact page as I have been listen to the CD in the car as I drive, but most of this is in HBP. 1. Tom killed his father and grandparents before he was 17. (Harry asks DD the question about underage magic detection at the Gaunt home) Tom must have still been in school then. Maybe did it on summer vacation or something. 2. Tom killed 3 people at the scene of his first murder. I had assumed that he started making the Horcruxes at that time, but I am wrong. He only had the diary and the ring. He did not get the locket till later, probably when he went to work for Borgin. (Borgin's pensive memory shows us that Merope sold the locket just before Tom was born.) Also if Tom was only 16 or so did he know how to make a horcrux at that time? Probably not, as you say it may be connected to his appearance. But how much time can elapse between the time you kill and the time you make the horcrux? And if killing splits your soul and Tom killed 3 people as a teenager, where did his soul parts go until he made the horcruxes if he could even make them later with such an "old" killing? All of this leads us to ask: Was the diary a horcrux? Does it count as #1? (I thought that is was, but maybe not. Maybe Tom did use a different spell for that, because he was still young and did not know how to do it. I forgot what DD said about that. Did he confirm that the diary was or not?) The ring is a horcrux, but when was it made? Whose death was used to activate it? DD tells us that LV was planning to use Harry's death to make the last horcrux. (Somewhere in book HBP, sorry don't know page.) So we know that sometime between the ring and GH that LV had 5 horcruxes. We really don't know what the 6th one is, but DD thinks that it is Nagini. I don't think that Harry is a horcrux because LV was probably alone and he did not kill Harry nor did he have time to do anything since he became Vapormort right away. We are also told by DD that the murders were important. That there was some significance to each murder that LV used to make a horcrux. That is why he wanted Harry's murder for his last horcrux. To answer G.C. : DD also tell us that the mouth-organ was "only ever a mouth-organ". I like Randy's idea that maybe Rowling used the Eye of Horde concept in Horcrux making. Given what she has used in the past it makes sense. If we follow that course we have the 5 senses and the 6th sense for the last one. This would make a lot of "sense", I think. How does each Horcrux match up with the senses? And I am back to asking what death goes with each horcrux and what is our timeline? Let's try making a chart of the killings, the object and the time. Tonks_op From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed May 24 17:25:47 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 17:25:47 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152814 > nowheregirrrl: > The > link is: > http://www.redhen-publications.com/Loyaulte.html zgirnius: I don't buy the theory, but would second the recommendation. That essay is a nice read. > nowheregirrrl: > The three instances Jodel points out: > 1. The Marietta Edgecombe incident. DD tells the Aurors and Ministry > people that HE organized Dumbledore's Army. zgirnius: I would hesitate to speak for Alla, but I believe her point is that Dumbledore would not lie to HARRY, not that he would not lie at all. In PS/SS Dumbledore told Harry that he would not lie to him, but that there might be questions he would refuse to answer. I see a good deal of evidence in the books to support the idea that Dumbledore has kept this promise, though in ways which might be termed deceptive. I do think Dumbledore tries to guide Harry away from questions he would prefer not to answer in preference to having Harry raise them, and refusing to answer, but that is not lying either, is it? The notable example I think we could all agree on would be the story of the Prophecy as told in OotP. Harry is shown the memory by having Trelawney rise out of the Pensieve, insetad of entering the Pensieve to see the scene. (We now know this hid the indentity of Snapem the eavesdropper). And when Dumbledore talks about the eavesdropper, he gives no hint that his identity was known to him at the time, or would be of any siugnificance to Harry. though of course it is both. > nowheregirrrl: > 2. The prophesy being overheard (see Lilygale's comment above). Of > course he lied to Harry as DD knew Voldemort was sharing Harry's brain > for most of that year. DD couldn't tell Harry anything about Snape > other than the DD and SS cover story that they've been telling for > years. zgirnius: I disagree that we know Dumbledore lied about the prophecy, or anything else, to Harry in OotP. He did avoid Harry for most of the year, which was certainly a way to avoid questions he did not want to answer because Voldemort might overhear. He tells Harry as much, at the end. Red Hen makes an argument that Dumbledore's account of the events is factually incorrect because Snape heard the entire prophecy. Based on the statement of Trelawney, this is certainly a possibility, but Trelawney's statement does not rule out Dumbledore's version of the story. For example: Snape is listening at the door. Trelawney starts prophesying (she feels a little odd, as per her statement). The barman, having just come up the stairs, sees Snape and unceremoniously yanks him away after he hears the bit we have all been told Voldemort knows. Snape and the barman struggle, and Snape makes protestations of innocence. During this short struggle, Trelawney completes the Prophecy. Having gained the upper hand (hey, Snape is a skinny 20-year old, the barman has been dealing with the colorful clientele of the Hog's Head lo these many years) the barman throws open the door and drags Snape in to let Dumbledore know what he has found. Trelawney, now out of her trance, sees this and remembers it. Dumbledore is now more disposed to give her a job (hey, she IS a Seer! and she has inside her head a hot secret Voldemort would love to know.) Death Eater Snape heads out to report the only part of hte prophecy he heard. I don't see a problem. > 3. Snape's remorse regarding the Potter's deaths. Of course he felt > remorse, just as DD did. But DD insinuates Snape's remorse made him > turn. That's likely a lie. Snape was already DDM. > zgirnius: Well, I don't see the evidence, other than the possibility he knew the whole prophecy. What evidence we have hangs together well with the story of Snape having been in truth a Death Eater at the time he delivered the prophecy. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Wed May 24 17:13:03 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 17:13:03 -0000 Subject: RAB / Amelia Bones and her murder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152816 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > In the process of some detective work regarding RAB, I was > considering the possibility of it being Amelia Bones. (Yes, I know > we all think that it is Sirius's brother. But I was just checking > all leads.) At the Lexicon it says that her middle name was Susan so > she can't have been using Amelia as a middle name and something with > a R as a first name. BUT > I see that she was killed by LV himself. WHY? Why was she so > important to be killed by LV himself?? What was he looking for? > Did he just want to make a statement that not even the head of the > Dept. of Magical Law Enforcement was safe? I tend to think that > there was more to it than that. But what? > > By the way, RAB backwards is BAR. Perhaps it isn't Regulus at all, > but someone in the Hogshead or another bar. Aberforth? That > doesn't make sense, or course, because DD would have known about it. > But it is interesting that is does spell bar. Not that it means > anything. One must explore all possibilities and not jump to the > obvious conclusions. > > Thoughts anyone?? Najwa now: I do agree that we should look into all the possibilities of who RAB might be. In another post I was trying to see if there was any wordplay on Stubby Boardman, but I was reminded that The Quibbler thought Sirius was Stubby, however since Regalus is his brother, that it could have been a case of mistaken identity. I think perhaps if we make a list of anyone who could have the initials RAB, or at least 2 out of three initials, and maybe we can include titles as well, such as Reverend or whatever, we could take a look at who RAB might be. It could just be the initials of a name they made for themselves, like how Tom created Lord Voldemort. The following names I found in the Lexicon, I've tried to narrow it down so as not to just throw out unlikely suspects: 1. Ali Bashir-(maybe he got tired of smuggling flying carpets? Doubtful he'd be RAB, but for the sake of the post I'll add him) 2. Alphard Black-Any canon that proves he's really dead? He could have been considered dead since he went against the family and gave the runaway nephew some money. 3. Arcturus Black- He died apparently in 1991, but he still could have done the switch and left the fake by then. 4.Bertie (Robert?) Bott- maybe he can do more than just make candy! 5.Rupert 'Axebanger' Brookstanton (looks like a read herring to me) 6.Rosalind Antigone Bungs That's all I could come up with, I did search the A's and the R's but didn't come up with anything of interest. Any thoughts or additional input? Najwa From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 17:53:51 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 17:53:51 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152817 > >>Lupinlore: > And therein is the problem, because many of us simply don't agree > that "nice" and "good" are not the same thing. Or let me put it > another way -- one can be nice without being good. However, I > really don't think it's possible to be good without being nice. > Betsy Hp: Which means that Hermione is clearly bad. She branded a girl's face. I cannot see that being described as a "nice" action. Ever. We've also got Hagrid mocking Draco being attacked by a teacher, ergo, Hagrid is no longer good since that wasn't "nice" behavior. We've got Dumbledore knocking out those folks in his office so he could make his get-away, so he's bad now too. We've got McGonagall demanding that her house shun Neville and never apologizing for her mistake (PoA), and also mocking Trelawney, so she's bad as well. Let's see... Ron makes fun of Moaning Myrtle. Harry takes his frustration out on his cousin. Arthur Weasley throws his son out of his house. Molly Weasley openly shuns Hermione. Ginny is mean to various folks. All of the teachers in Hogwarts are less than nice to Umbridge. My goodness, it looks like the entire Potterverse is populated by "not always nice so therefore not good" people. According to the rules of karma, I guess Voldemort will win and the Potterverse will be destroyed. Betsy Hp From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 18:03:50 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 18:03:50 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good...was Hagrid and Snape, Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152818 > > Leslie41: > > > > Yes, exactly. "Nice" is defined as "pleasant or pleasing or > > agreeable in nature or appearance". Snape's not "nice". He's > > most definitely unpleasant and disagreeable. But the > > word "nice" has little meaning in a moral sense. One can be > > very "nice" and not be good at all. > > Lupinlore: > And therein is the problem, because many of us simply don't agree > that "nice" and "good" are not the same thing. Or let me put it > another way -- one can be nice without being good. However, I > really don't think it's possible to be good without being nice. Leslie41: Tell that to Jesus. There's plenty in the New Testament that shows him to be a surly fellow who confronts people (often angrily) and tells them exactly what they don't want to hear. Had Jesus been "nicer," my guess is he wouldn't have ended up hanging on a cross. I can come up with other examples from religion or history if you like, but that's just the most potent one. > Lupinlore: > And that is where the question of whether Snape can ever be > admirable or deserve to be praised comes in, doesn't it? I would > say most definitely NO. Because, you see, I think some of use do > hold that nice VERY DEFINITELY has meaning in the moral sense. Leslie41: But how can "nice" have meaning in the moral sense when you yourself just admitted that "nice" people are often not "good"? If one can be nice without being good, how *can* it have meaning in the moral sense? And, my own example of Jesus nonwithstanding (which I think shows that one can be good without being nice) why would it be necessary to be nice in order to be considered good to begin with? > Lupinlore: > And a person who abuses children simply can never be seen as good, > or admirable, or worthy of praise. Leslie41: There are two problems here: one is that you keep bringing up the issue of "abuse" as if it's factual, which it most certainly is not. It's your opinion, one that isn't necessarily shared by myself or any number of others. But for the sake of argument, let's agree on that point in this one instance. Snape abuses his students. Does that eradicate any other good that he might do? Any other actions which might be worthy of admiration or praise? Or does the fact that he's an abuser invalidate every positive thing he does? Can we not praise Snape for being brave and selfless and putting his life at great risk for the order? (You might not think he does, but again, for the sake of argument, let's agree on this as well.) Do you think that Snape's "abuse" of his students makes him wholly and completely bad and incapable of good? Or doing anything praiseworthy? The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. > Lupinlore: > And thus we stand on the bridge, with one side saying > passionately "nice is not the same thing as good" and the others > of us saying with unmovable firmness "oh yes it most certainly is." Leslie41: I think you yourself have admitted that nice is not the same as good. See above. From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Wed May 24 19:01:56 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:01:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What did Neville Forget? (was Re: Why Didn't DD or Snape kill Voldemort?) In-Reply-To: <20060524092830.70723.qmail@web53201.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060524190156.17082.qmail@web37214.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152819 Maria Vaerewijck wrote: maria8162001: I am more inclined to believed that his memory was blocked with a spell by his mother?) so he would not remeber what it is he have seen or ought to remember at that age.(snip) So if Neville was like my daughter when he was young then he saw and remember something which he is not suppposed to see, which could be a very strong reason for his mother to stop him from remembering it, whatever it is.(snip) Catherine now: What if Neville saw his parents tortured and killed? That would be traumatizing to say the least! But I don't think it was his mom that put the spell on him. I thinkk it would be his gran. Didn't she fail her Charms O.W.L.? That might account for his continued poor memory, as she might have messed it up a bit. Or, as with Bertha Jorkins, the memory charm that addled her up a bit by Crouch Sr. , was because (IIRC) it was quite a thing that he had to make her forget. But Lockhart, who was self-processed very good at memory charms porbably did them well enough that the person was quite normal afterwards, and just forgot the story that they told him, or forgot that they did it. Maybe he altered the memory so that they remembered that it was Lockhart and not themselves in the memory. Who knows? But it could very well be a bungled memory charm at work on poor Neville.... Catherine --------------------------------- Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Wed May 24 19:18:13 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:18:13 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152820 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > And therein is the problem, because many of us simply don't agree > that "nice" and "good" are not the same thing. Or let me put it > another way -- one can be nice without being good. However, I > really don't think it's possible to be good without being nice. > Steven1965aaa: I think you would agree that there are many examples of Ron not acting in a manner which would be considered "nice" (see Luna's comment that he can be rather unkind at times). I'd have a hard time characterizing Sirius as "nice". Both however are unquestionably "good". I think that "nice" goes to demeanor and how one treats others, important certainly but distinct and independent from "good / evil". From dkrasnansky at hotmail.com Wed May 24 16:23:51 2006 From: dkrasnansky at hotmail.com (david_krasnansky) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:23:51 -0000 Subject: DD death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152821 > > bjk5377 wrote: > > Are we sure DD's dead? When Harry thought he saw a > > phoenix rise out of the flames around DD's coffin, could that > > not have been DD? > > Najwa: > Some believe that there is a possibility that Dumbledore is still > alive, but I don't think so. When you say the phoenix rising > out of the coffin being him, are you suggesting he's an animagus in > the form of a phoenix? I don't put it past him, but I don't see > that happening either. David: If you want to believe Dumbledore is alive he can be. Reread HBP with Dumbledore's animagus as a spider, his patronis as a phoenix and with the transfiguration of Wormtail to look like Dumbledore. I believe a wizard can transfigure another wizard as long as they are present, otherwise like a spring stretched they will retake their original form when the force is no longer applied. From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Wed May 24 00:24:53 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 20:24:53 EDT Subject: Word play RAB and Stubby Boardman Message-ID: <448.17d84c1.31a501d5@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152822 In a message dated 24/05/2006 00:58:14 GMT Standard Time, empress.najwa at gmail.com writes: > Stubby Boardman == Dobby stun mad RAB Or Dam Dobby nuts RAB Burst a damn Dobby Um - Dobbys bra stand Mad busty bob ran Clare From bawilson at citynet.net Wed May 24 19:02:35 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:02:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Secondary World or Satire? was RE: Inconsistencies Message-ID: <7889.129.71.218.25.1148497355.squirrel@citymail.citynet.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152823 "rosie743" wrote: > I've been reading posts here for awhile, and have noticed many > references to JKR's inattentiveness to the minutia of the WW, for > lack of a better term. I've only noticed a few myself, would > anyone like to fill me in on the rest? > ....Lupinlore cracks knuckles.... >> Well, that is certainly an interesting question. I guess inconsistency relates to two different areas: inconsistency of CHARACTER and inconsistency of WORLD. Character inconsistency means that characters behave in ways at odds with the message about them JKR is trying to send. World inconsistency relates to fundamental problems with the internal logic of the world JKR presents. I think you mean the latter. << BAW: I've been playing with the idea that JKR is not so much a worldbuilder after the manner of e.g. JRRT or CSL or whoever wrote the Islandia books (the name escapes me), but more a satirist after the manner of Swift in "Gulliver's Travels." Lilliput, Brobidnag, the Flying Island of Lapatua, and the Land of the Huynahims (sp? The country ruled by intelligent horses who kept savage, feral humans called 'yahoos'.) were not so much intended as internally consistent imagined realities inspiring secondary belief, but rather were intended to give Swift a chance to deliver well-deserved and well-targeted kicks to certain aspects of his society. (For example, the countries of Lilliput and Blifescu being embroiled in a religious war and the chief doctrinal difference between the two sects was as which end was it proper to break a hard-boiled egg. In Swift's time, Catholic and Protestant countries were regularly fighting wars over differences in doctrine and praxis that were almost as insignificant; Swift was a clergyman, you will remember, Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral in Dublin.) Do we not see more than a bit of this in JKR? BAW From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Wed May 24 19:39:18 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:39:18 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152824 SSSusan's QUESTIONS: > 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's > curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not ask > the librarian? Ceridwen: Harry's not the type to drag out a book and look it up. It's easier to ask Hermione. In this case, I don't even think Harry's too worried about what an Unbreakable Vow is. He mentions it to Ron, if I recall correctly, and Ron just tells him about his near-brush with Twinly death. I'm not saying that Harry isn't curious. I don't think he's curious about the UV. > 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted > Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get > Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were > doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) > would've learned about UVs? Ceridwen: I think the twins were trying to get Ron to promise to do something that would ultimately be dangerous for him. At seven, they may not have grasped the idea that funny is not always safe. I think they grasped the basic idea of a vow, yes. But I don't think they grasped the details of this one. They probably heard about it when someone talked about it on the wireless (a WW soap opera, perhaps?), or overheard their parents talking about it either between themselves, or with guests. > 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron & > Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon her & > Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron to F&G? Do > you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing in" to Ron's > love life from hers? Ceridwen: So many possibilities! Can I just say 'yes'? I think she wanted to get back at him and give him a taste of his own medicine. I think she told F&G specifically because they are in the same position to Ron as Ron is to Ginny - the children just ahead of him, who were probably told to look after little bro when they played, and when he started Hogwarts. In this capacity, I wouldn't be surprised if Ginny did talk to them about Ron quite a bit. Ginny may also have been setting them on Ron's scent so they wouldn't start worrying after her and her love life as they did during the summer. > 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the > kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about > others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? Ceridwen: Yes again. The two are not mutually exclusive. Of course the twins care about their mother. That doesn't mean they want to tempt her wrath! Fred not only played nice, but he played safe here as well. > 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to > tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help Draco? > Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, relying > upon others more? Ceridwen: I think it does signal a change. Harry has been growing up through the series. This is another example. > 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape > is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get > information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's > that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's > statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these > years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is > the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the > fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When > is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry > correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? Ceridwen: 'How to act' doesn't necessarily mean acting, as in becoming a different character. Substitute 'behave'. Draco is being sullen and surly and confrontational. I think Snape is reminding him (sullenly and surlily - is there such a word?) that one catches more flies with honey than with vinegar. But, at some point, Snape does have to act. When that is, is one of the bigger mysteries of the series, I think. Is he acting with DD or with LV? Or with both? In any event, he's a pretty good actor. He's still alive and walking free. > 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by > the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience > and/or are cruel? Ceridwen: Yet another hillarious, cruel stunt by the twins. But then, I wouldn't want the pest in my house at all, stunned or not. I mean, what if it got unstunned and started biting people? Yes. I worry about things like that. > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and > welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds > Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet > over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not > have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? Ceridwen: I'm one of the ones who fault Molly for not being a better hostess. But by Christmas, I think the situation is out of hand. Who dreamed up having two opinionated women sharing the same house for a year or so? The Three Day rule applies here: Guests are like fish - after three days, they begin to stink. In this case, Fleur is in the wrong. If she doesn't like the music, take Bill somewhere private and snog. Preferably, rent a room and get out of there for a while. Or, stun Bill and put him alongside the angelic gnome, since I get the feeling all of this wonderful togetherness was his idea. > 10. The scene with Harry, Arthur & Lupin is one which, when we look > back upon it, is clearly setting us up for the tower scene. It is > filled with the kinds of remarks and statements which feel > like "great pronouncements" or "truths" or "key insights," such > as "It comes down to whether you trust DD's judgment" and "But > Dumbledore can make mistakes" and "You are determined to hate him, > Harry" and "Has it occurred to you, Harry, that Snape was simply > pretending??" Play those lines off one another, and you pretty much > have the DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape camps after the tower scene, no? > (As well as the "DD could NEVER have been that wrong about Snape" > vs. "DD can make BIG mistakes" camps.) Comments? Additionally, > Lupin makes some remarks here about Snape which surprised some fans. > Was he speaking what he truly believed? Did you believe him? Ceridwen: I think Lupin is speaking from a different place than Harry has ever been. Lupin's been living as a spy since the summer, he probably has an appreciation of Snape's position now that he didn't have before. It seemed to me that Lupin was singularily emotionless when he said that. He seems tired in this scene. He smiles with a little too much understanding later on. He defers to Dumbledore when he would have been more understanding of Harry's position before. Some people have suggested that Lupin knows Occlumency, or at least Legilimency. I think this scene could point to him knowing Occlumency, and being still partially in the Occlumency loop like Snape is, only Lupin- style. > 11. It is clear, to Lupin anyway, that Harry is *hoping* that the > HBP is his father. This is reinforced by the fact that Harry is > disappointed when he checks the book's date and sees it's too old to > have been his dad's era. Harry has also previously stated that the > HBP is a better potions teacher than Snape. Why does Harry like the > HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? And what > does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has something changed in > Snape, to have made him truly a lesser teacher now than then? Or is > it simply the removal, for Harry, of Snape the person and their > unpleasant history from the mix, so that he's seeing "pure teaching" > in the book and not the personality of the teacher? Ceridwen: Harry wants to know and like his father. Understandable. The HBP has a certain sense of humor that another schoolboy might like (shove a bezoar down their throats), irreverant and witty. The reality might not be as great as the reading, though. I wonder if the entire scene with Remus Lupin isn't an answer in some parts to fans and our speculation. Do we agree with Dumbledore, or not? A sarcastic friend is great at parties, until the wit is turned against oneself. The Prince isn't teaching in the book, he's making notes for himself. I don't think Snape would have taken on teaching if he had any other option, at least not at this level where many of his students are only taking his subject because it's required. His notes are his own, so he isn't stressed about the reader understanding them or appreciating them. > 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? Ceridwen: I don't know if they would. But there are times when any sort of change must seem better than what they have now. > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't > stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why > or why not? Ceridwen: Not surprised. I wouldn't be surprised if Percy did want to see his family, only not under those circumstances. It's obvious that Scrimgeour only uses Percy to get into the Weasley house to speak to Harry. I don't think Percy likes it. I think he knows what it must say about him, bringing an outsider in who only wants to take advantage. He's stiff, he strikes out across the yard in front of Scrimgeour as if to distance himself from the inevitable. He could be read as not wanting to be there, but I really do think he didn't want to be there *under those circumstances*. > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good > but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his > behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? Ceridwen: He's trying to be what he thought his parents wanted - a ministry employee with a good position. He just didn't get the fine points. I think he's in a very good position for the Order, if a reconciliation takes place. > 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and then > knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is determined not to > give it to him. We see a Harry who I would argue is self- possessed, > confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in sticking up for what he > believes is right. Were you surprised at the growth he displayed, or > was this just exactly what you would have expected from him? What > did you think of Harry in this scene? Ceridwen: Harry was admirable in this scene. He didn't insult Scrimgeour, he tried to be polite, he didn't let Scrimgeour walk all over him or intimidate him. I think this is a shining example of Harry growing up. > 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if > you like. Ceridwen: Scrimgeour is manipulative and grasping. He needs to be, to some extent, to survive in politics. He is harsh, I would expect, but decisive. In some ways, the opposite of Fudge. But since the Ministry seems to have been set up as a third party and in opposition to the Order on one level or another, he will never understand Harry or the Order and its people. > Siriusly Snapey Susan, > who would like to thank Penapart Elf, Potioncat, Jen R., Alla & Carol > for their comments, suggestions and/or encouragement. Ceridwen, thanking SSSusan for a wonderful summary and questions. From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 19:06:39 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:06:39 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152825 > > Potioncat: > > Snape is incredibly unpleasant, but he's shown that he'll come > > through when things get tough. Some nice people in the series have > > not been so loyal. > > Leslie41: > > Yes, exactly. "Nice" is defined as "pleasant or pleasing or > agreeable in nature or appearance". Snape's not "nice". He's most > definitely unpleasant and disagreeable. But the word "nice" has > little meaning in a moral sense. One can be very "nice" and not be > good at all. Lanval: Not trying to speak for Alla here, but I got the impression that she was talking about nice as in "kind", not as in "polite/pleasant". English isn't my first language, but 'nice' CAN mean both, right? Leslie41: > For example: I'm sure that if I met George Bush he'd be > very "nice". Amiable, friendly, pleasant. Etc. etc. etc. But that > wouldn't convince me in the slightest that he's "good". Lanval: Ha. We've never agreed more. :) Now, to get back to the general subject: is niceness really that negligible, that unimportant? Can doing what is right and/or good completely excuse all-encompassing, lifelong nastiness toward just about everyone? Superficial friendliness/politeness certainly can make life more agreeable (after all ,who likes to be snarled at by the supermarket cashier, just because she had a spat with her boyfriend that morning?), yet what about a co-worker who's all sweetness to your face, but talks nasty things behind your back? An honest show of dislike (within civilized limits, of course) would be preferred by most, I think. Last night watching 'House, MD', there was an exchange between House and a "patient" (don't want to go into details here, with those in mind who haven't yet seen it, or those who aren't familiar with the show). And these lines made me think: "People aren't tactful and polite just because it's nice. They do it because they've got an ounce of humility. Because they know they will make mistakes and they know that their actions have consequences. And they know that those consequences are their fault." I don't really agree with the last statement, but on the whole it makes a good case for being the right kind of 'nice'. And that, I think, is why Adult!Snape's Not-Niceness (I won't judge him as a child or teenager, that wouldn't be fair) bothers me so much. I don't see a shred of humility, or compassion, evident in the man. Not yet, I would add. We never get a glimpse inside his mind; we can only judge him by his actions, but when I picture Snape's mind, I see a churning black pool of resentment, self-pity, contempt, and anger. He has a chip on his shoulder roughly the size of Mt Everest, and contrary to those who to think that Snape suffers from low self-esteem, my impression actually is that he has a fairly large ego. How DARE people disagree with him! How DARE these brats talk back! I wonder, sometimes, about the Snape-loved-Lily theory. And how Snape, if he was obsessed, or in love/lust with Lily, would have reacted if Lily 'dared' to reject him -- and then chose James, of all people. How the rage he felt at her may have played a part in taking the prophesy to LV. It would be another explanation for the huge amount of remorse DD speaks of -- if Snape indeed felt guilt and remorse. But until we get more details, that's all pure speculation. As usual. Finally, to bring up Sirius once again: Adult!Sirius is not always nice, though I personally find him a lot nicer than his reputation. Some say that he only joined the Order because a)James did, and b) it was a way to get back at his parents; his fighting LV had nothing to do with moral decisions, nor idealism; it was all for adventure, danger, rebellion. But by joining the Order he did what many are convinced Snape is doing: fighting on the side of good. Does this, then, make Sirius "good"? Does it outweigh, in the end, all the ugly things he did (again, as an adult. Let's keep the schooldays out of it for once...)? From bawilson at citynet.net Wed May 24 19:22:25 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 15:22:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption Message-ID: <13249.129.71.218.25.1148498545.squirrel@citymail.citynet.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152826 > Leslie41: > "Keeping the plot interesting" does not constitute a defense of > the character's actions morally. It's a cop out. Lupinlore: >> EXACTLY! Which is precisely, IMO, why Dumbledore's reprehensible failure to intervene at the Dursleys or to prevent Snape's abuse of Harry cannot be excused on those grounds -- which it often is. "If DD had restrained the Dursleys the story would be boring." "If DD had restrained Snape the story would be boring." Nonsense! Such an excuse is only a cop out, and in no way gets the "epitome of goodness" out of the hot water his manifold sins of omission have landed him in. << BAW: Of course, I could reiterate that Snape, as mean and nasty as he is, is not an abuser; I could again point out that meanness and nastyness do not constitute abuse in and of themselves; I could point out that for all his faults Snape is an EFFECTIVE teacher, in that even Harry got an E (more or less the same thing as a B+) on his Potions Owl. But I won't go into that, as we have hashed it out quite thoroughly. The Dursleys are another matter; I don't understand why DD didn't intervene before HBP. All I can think is that (a) the Blood Protection was the only way to keep Harry alive, and that as miserable as Harry's life with the Dursleys was, it was a LIFE, which is better than the alternative; and (b) before he realized how horrid the Dursleys were, DD agreed that in exchange for the Dursleys taking Harry in, he would not interfere in how they chose to raise him (and, of course, by the time he realized his error it was too late; we know how the wizardling world feels about contracts.) But I acknowledge that this is rather weak, and hope that we learn more in Book VII. One thing I noticed when I re-read PS/SS was that the Dursleys were trying to keep Harry from his wizardling heritage because they considered it DANGEROUS. It seems that, as mean and wrongheaded as they were, they are trying to protect him. And Vernon seems to love Petunia. So perhaps the Dursleys aren't all bad. (I can't think of any redeeming qualities for Dudley.) BAW From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 18:43:30 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 18:43:30 -0000 Subject: What is Manipulation (was Re: Nice versus good, was: Hagrid and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152827 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marionrosnl" wrote: > Remus Lupin is always kind, polite, politically correct, always > prepared to find excuses for people's behaviour and so *nice* it > scares me. The man is so *fake* it hurts! He never shows what he > feels, truly feels. He never get angry, never shouts at people, > even when confronted with Pettigrew (finding out after twelve > years that the friend he supposedly mourned was a traitor and the > friend he condemned to Azkaban was innocent) he keeps his cool and > shows no great emotion. He's so eventempered that it is subhuman. > But for all his 'niceness' (or perhaps because of it) he is also > incredibly manipulative: he knows how to win people and how to > piss off those he dislikes in such a way that he *still* looks > nice (that BoggartSnape incident was no accident, I tell you). Well, I certainly agree that Remus has a lot of problems, and you have certainly touched on some of them. So let's focus on one issue you bring up -- the charge of being manipulative. I think this is important because it shows up with regard to DD as well -- in fact, it's hard to have any mention of DD without it showing up. What is manipulative? What about DD and Lupin lead people to suspect that they may be being manipulative? Is it being nice and getting what you want from other people? I suppose it depends. I would say that manipulation occurs when there is miscommunication. That is, when one person thinks "Oh, this is the nicest guy," and the other is thinking "Oh, now to get what I want." In other words, manipulation occurs when a lie is involved. On the other hand, if the verbal cues and protocols are well understood by all involved, there is no lie and hence no manipulation. I went to school in the American South. I remember clearly when a friend from New York exploded because he thought he had been manipulated and lied to, when the others of us (all raised in the area) could see no such. Finally, another of my friends simply shook his head and said "Poor Kent, he simply doesn't understand how civilized people communicate with each other." Exchanges that to us seemed perfectly transparent and straightforward were to him examples of rank dishonesty. For instance he felt misused when he found out a certain person disliked him a lot. It was very obvious to all the rest of us that the dislike was there and that said person had been attempting to clearly communicate it. But somehow it didn't get through. More directly with regard to Lupin, I think he is often in denial. However I don't think he means to lie, which is what it takes to be manipulative. When he told Harry that he neither liked nor disliked Snape, I think Harry was right to be sceptical, but not because Lupin was deliberately telling a lie, but rather because it's hard to credit that that's how the man really feels, despite what he might tell himself. DD's problem is more the first kind. He just isn't very good at communicating. It probably comes from being surrounded by people so much younger than himself -- and indeed, he confesses something like that. DD is much more to be blamed that Lupin, I think, because he has much more of a burden to make sure his messages are getting across clearly. In that they don't, he at the very least has a severe problem. Finally, I think most of this isn't really the problem of the characters at all. I think it comes from the fact that Rowling knows them so well that sometimes when she thinks she's getting things across clearly she isn't. Hence the fiasco with DD's speech at the end of OOTP. Lupinlore From grich277080 at aol.com Wed May 24 17:59:30 2006 From: grich277080 at aol.com (grich277080 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 13:59:30 EDT Subject: RAB / Amelia Bones and her murder Message-ID: <42e.20f7a44.31a5f902@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152828 ~aussie~: >> Amelia Bones' death was a piece in a much bigger picture. One that included Hepizbah Smith and James Potter as having pure blood lines from the founders of Hogwarts. His search for other wizarding heirs may be a motive for kidnapping of Florean Fortescue (HBP 6), provider of ice-cream sundaes and ADVICE ABOUT MEDIEVAL WITCHCRAFT to Harry (POA 4). He may be reknown a history expert and easier to grab than Professor Binns (not only because he is in Hogwarts, but also because it is hard to grab a ghost). (Lexicon also says a Fortescue was a past Headmaster of Hogwarts - OOP 27) I think LV is not on a quest that started from Tom Riddle, but a Dark Wizard quest inherited through the ages. I have some rough ideas it may extend back as far as Salazar Slytherin himself. (The Basilisk may not have been the only thing of SS locked in the Chamber of Secrets for centuries, known only in rumours to even Professor Binns.) It was the 3 other founders unity in accepting Muggle-born to study at Hogwarts that drove Slytherin away. With those heirs gone, Salazar's heir can try to reclaim the school for pure bloods. << AnnR: This is the first time I have heard this theory re the founders and Amelia Bones' death. Is there any canon to say that Amelia was a Ravenclaw? Is Hepzibah Smith a Hufflepuff, I can't remember, or is it the other way around? I know James was Gryffindor. I like the idea of the dark wizard theory being passed through the ages before Tom Riddle. Does anyone else think the same as aussie? From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Wed May 24 20:08:36 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:08:36 EDT Subject: Secondary World or Satire? was RE: Inconsistencies Message-ID: <40f.2db3a1f.31a61744@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152829 bawilson at citynet.net writes: >Do we not see more than a bit of this in JKR? < Clare: A bit maybe but no more. Swift was the master of all satirists, the big cheese on the cheesiest cheese wheel in cheese town. They are incomparable. I adore JKRs world, but it IS an escapist one. Anything which deals with issues of racism, prejudice, war and cultural identity can be thematically compared to a satire but the styles are radically different and Swift's is far more complex, academic and erudite. Swift is a great writer, Rowling is a good writer who is a great entertainer. It is somewhat akin to comparing Helen Fielding to Emily Bronte, both created characters and romances that touched people and in some cases affected them deeply but Helen Fielding is not comparable in skill and eloquence to Emily Bronte. I dislike both of them, it is merely an example and I adore both Swift and Rowling but Rowling has to take the stalls under Swift's private box at the world's stage. Rowling can weave a fantastic story, Swift wove an untouchable masterpiece of linguistic and cerebral brilliance. Is she satirising? No, she is not. She is touching on themes which can be shared with satires. They can be shared with other genres too; they are not the possession of satire itself. She can research, she can riddle, she can backtrack an ending to incorporate clues for a mystery, she can blend genres, she can plan a series to incorporate references not picked up until three books further down the line -which is no mean feat - but a satirist? In my opinion she just isn't intellectual enough to pull it off. Regardless of my opinion, the features of a satire are absent from the books. smiles, Clare x [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From huntergreen3 at aol.com Wed May 24 20:40:58 2006 From: huntergreen3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 20:40:58 -0000 Subject: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: <13249.129.71.218.25.1148498545.squirrel@citymail.citynet.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152830 Leslie41 wrote: > "Keeping the plot interesting" does not constitute a defense of > the character's actions morally. It's a cop out. Lupinlore replied: >>> EXACTLY! Which is precisely, IMO, why Dumbledore's reprehensible failure to intervene at the Dursleys [snip] <<< BAW: >>The Dursleys are another matter; I don't understand why DD didn't intervene before HBP. All I can think is that (a) the Blood Protection was the only way to keep Harry alive, and that as miserable as Harry's life with the Dursleys was, it was a LIFE, which is better than the alternative; and (b) before he realized how horrid the Dursleys were, DD agreed that in exchange for the Dursleys taking Harry in, he would not interfere in how they chose to raise him [snip] But I acknowledge that this is rather weak, and hope that we learn more in Book VII.<< HunterGreen: Perhaps it was more simple than that. I think we already have our explanation, simply that he had no other choice than the Dursleys. After that it could have been a combination of not knowing how bad the situation was and being unable to do anything about it. Vernon and Petunia *hated* having Harry there (and as horrible as that is, its not like they OFFERED to take Harry in), it was a near miracle that they took him in. If Dumbledore or some other magical person stepped in and threatened them or "had a talk" with them, the response was likely to be, "Fine, YOU take him then!". They were treating Harry awfully, but they weren't starving him, or putting him in the hospital with injuries (and anything that horrible was likely to cause spurts of magic), in other words, Harry wasn't going to die or end up irreparably damaged, so therefore he was still, in a strange way, better off there. Mrs. Figg lived down the road and after a few years Harry was in school (where any serious injuries or signs of neglect would be noticed), so its not like he was *completely* abandoned. The protection from Petunia's blood had the desired effect at least. It was Neville's family who were attacked a few years after Voldemort's downfall; and Harry would not have lived in GoF had the plan to kidnap Harry not involved a portkey (if, for example, Peter could just barge into the Dursley's house in the middle of the night and kidnap him). -HunterGreen/Rebecca From okbkenan007 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 20:38:22 2006 From: okbkenan007 at yahoo.com (Oded, Kerstin and Billy Kenan) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 13:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sexy Snape ? JKR's men Message-ID: <20060524203822.40060.qmail@web31903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152831 Hi everyone, Just joined the list a little while ago, but so far was too shy, I guess, to post anything. I was so amazed at how many of you actually like Snape or find him attractive. First I never really did pay that much attention to him and then I think I just kind of accepted Harry's view on him. So I can't really see anything favourable about him. He would be a person in real life I would walk on the other side of the street for if I saw him coming. But the good thing about all this "sexy Snape" talk is that it gives me an excuse to go back and read the books yet again (maybe 4 times wasn't enough) to see if you are right and I missed out on a really special guy all this time. Now Sirius, of course, is totally an other matter. He would be by far the world's ultimate boyfriend, IMO. Ok. I admit he maybe a little bit challenging at times but maybe that's what I like about him. When he was murdered I couldn't even talk about it for 2 weeks without bursting into tears (may have had sth. to do with being pregnant at the time, you know hormones and stuff), but anyway, I still miss him. Maybe there is a way to get through that archway in the chamber of secrets and see him again. Kerstin From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 24 20:53:22 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 20:53:22 -0000 Subject: Nice Lupin (was: Nice versus good, was: Hagrid and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152832 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marionrosnl" wrote: > > Hi, newbie here. > > It always amazes me that so many people like Lupin because he > is 'nice'. I abhorr the man *because* he is 'nice'. > > Remus Lupin is always kind, polite, politically correct, always > prepared to find excuses for people's behaviour and so *nice* it > scares me. The man is so *fake* it hurts! He never shows what he > feels, truly feels. He never get angry, never shouts at people, even > when confronted with Pettigrew (finding out after twelve years that > the friend he supposedly mourned was a traitor and the friend he > condemned to Azkaban was innocent) he keeps his cool and shows no > great emotion. He's so eventempered that it is subhuman. But for all > his 'niceness' (or perhaps because of it) he is also incredibly > manipulative: he knows how to win people and how to piss off those > he dislikes in such a way that he *still* looks nice (that > BoggartSnape incident was no accident, I tell you). > > Passive-agressive one might say. > > Practically dissolve-into-the-background bland-natured. > > I don't trust people like that. Because they are slumbering > volcanos. Everybody thinks they're harmless little hills. Until the > lava erupts. Magpie: Heh--this is all reminding me of why I love Lupin. Yes, he is even- tempered and never letting anyone know what he's feeling, and that's why you should never underestimate him. Mwahahaha! I would disagree with the idea that even-temperedness means there's a volcano underneath there waiting to erupt--even-tempered or controlled does not have to mean you're repressing something huge. It's enough that the personality is closed and protected, that you don't know what the person is thinking. And really, he should be that way! Not only is he a werewolf which in itself is like a metaphor for having a different side under a pleasant surface, but given his position in society he's got every reason to constantly be protecting himself. He can't trust anyone or expect anything from anyone imo. So I find him intriguing for the very reasons he's potentially bad-- he keeps the secret about Sirius when he shouldn't, he shows some passive-resistance/passive-aggression to Snape about taking his Potion (I find that very intriguing and believable) and then later actually forgets to take the thing. He disappoints many fans (but not me!) by staying distant from Harry and not rushing to become his new daddy. He's calm about Sirius' death. Lupin's ultimately alone in the world, I think, and knows it. Yes, I think Lupin is a very good example of nice being different than good, because "good" is a decision that can be made many times. You're not just good and that's it, you have chances to choose good or bad all the time and sometimes you'll choose one and sometimes the other. In the Pensieve the "good" choice would be to put a stop to Snape being tormented, but Lupin chooses to do what is better for himself instead. (I also rather agree with Lupinlore that he approves of it on some level, though I would put it in a more backwards way: if Lupin is friends with James and Sirius it's at least obvious that he doesn't disapprove of this sort of thing enough to dislike them.) He chooses to keep silent about Sirius' secret in PoA not even out of any residual loyalty to Sirius (as Sirius himself might have kept James' secret if they were in the same positions) but because it keeps the waters calm for himself. When he says he neither likes nor dislikes Snape I think he's on one hand telling the truth--he really doesn't feel that strongly about him--he's not Harry or Sirius with extreme swings of emotion. Otoh I think he's being his natural self-protective, diplomatic self. His position is such that he can't go around making sweeping statements of preference. It's best for him to be more pragmatic. Anything he says could be used against him later. He's been abandoned before and probably always assumes it can and will happen again. Actually, Lupin may be the one member of the Marauders who sometimes feels a bit like Snape. This doesn't mean he can't ever do the right thing or make the "good" choice, of course. I don't think his type of personality means that he must be bad. Many people find his type of personality off-putting for just the reasons listed, though those judgments aren't always fair at all. It's taking a personality type and making it into a value judgment, and that can be dangerous. It may have gotten Lupin in trouble before, too. After all, we know that Lupin did seem to be suspected as the spy years ago, and as far as we know now, he wasn't. It was Peter, who was never suspected, because people made some false judgments about him based on his personality, perhaps. -m From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 21:03:29 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 21:03:29 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152833 > Lanval: > Last night watching 'House, MD', there was an exchange between > House and a "patient" (don't want to go into details here, with > those in mind who haven't yet seen it, or those who aren't > familiar with the show). And these lines made me think: > "People aren't tactful and polite just because it's nice. They do > it because they've got an ounce of humility. Because they know > they will make mistakes and they know that their actions have > consequences. And they know that those consequences are their > fault." > > I don't really agree with the last statement, but on the whole it > makes a good case for being the right kind of 'nice'. Yes, but I don't think it's accurate either. "Niceness" doesn't spring at all from any sort of humility. I think "niceness" (and manners, etc.) spring from a desire to do what is socially correct, and be socially accepted as a result. I think what that patient said about being polite actually applies much more to the concept of "forgiveness". But that wouldn't be as convenient, considering what the patient did to House. As for Snape, like House he doesn't give a hoo about being socially accepted. I think the characters are actually very much alike. > Lanval: > And that, I think, is why Adult!Snape's Not-Niceness (I won't > judge him as a child or teenager, that wouldn't be fair) bothers > me so much. I don't see a shred of humility, or compassion, > evident in the man. Leslie41: Oddly enough, this makes me admire him more. Humility and compassion are actually emotions that reward those that experience them. We feel good about ourselves, and about our actions, because we perceive ourselves as humble and compassionate. My guess is if we did not feel good about ourselves for exhibiting compassion, we would quickly squelch the emotion. How many of us would perform good works if we felt horrible about doing so? How many people would give to charity if it did not reinforce our own self-esteem? I don't think Snape is a compassionate person at all. Nor a humble one. I don't count against him for not being humble, as from what I can see Snape is actually the most powerful wizard alive, outside of Voldemort (at least by the end of HBP). And he's been an effective double-agent, and fooling either DD or Voldemort (or both) for decades. Not a reason for him to be humble, really. Any attempt at such would only ring false. And though Snape may not be "humble," neither is he a show-off. He's no Gilderoy Lockhart, that's for sure. In fact Snape hates those characteristics in others, and does not demonstrate them himself. As for him not being "compassionate," that depends on your view of compassion. Snape commits acts of compassion, even if he does not "feel" compassion, because it is the right thing to do. My guess is that he would feel that wallowing in compassion doesn't solve anything. I'm reminded of T'Pau, the leader of the Vulcans (Star Trek: Original Series), who presides over the death match between Kirk and Spock in "Amok Time". McCoy complains that it's too hot and the air is too thin on Vulcan for Kirk to be able to fight effectively. She doesn't respond with "compassion." "The air is the air," says T'Pau. "What can be done?" That seems to me to be Snape's attitude in general. (We haven't brought Vulcans into this, but of course they show as well that it is very possible to be good without being nice.) > Lanval: > when I picture Snape's mind, I see a churning black pool of > resentment, self-pity, contempt, and anger. He has a chip on his > shoulder roughly the size of Mt Everest... Leslie41: And yet he does the right thing anyway. I feel for the guy. > Lanval: > and contrary to those who to think that Snape suffers from low > self-esteem, my impression actually is that he has a fairly large > ego. Leslie41: A large ego that to my mind is well-deserved. It's not "fashionable" to have a large ego in our modern age. It's not "admirable". But that's only a recent attitude. Most ancient heroes had huge egos. And put them on display all the time. Plus, as I pointed out, if Snape does have a huge ego, he doesn't display it much. We have to intuit it from analyzing his other behaviors. > I wonder, sometimes, about the Snape-loved-Lily theory. And how > Snape, if he was obsessed, or in love/lust with Lily, would have > reacted if Lily 'dared' to reject him -- and then chose James, of > all people. How the rage he felt at her may have played a part in > taking the prophesy to LV. Leslie41: I don't think that is likely. Snape looked like "a plant grown in the dark". And never has he ever been shown to express any unrealistic ideas about his appeal, to students or anyone else. I think if he did love Lily he would not have dared to hope she loved him back. But I don't think he loved her. That's a romantic idea but not to my mind a logical one. > Lanval: > It would be another explanation for the huge amount of remorse DD > speaks of -- if Snape indeed felt guilt and remorse. But until we > get more details, that's all pure speculation. As usual. Leslie41: I think all the explanation we need for Snape JOINING the DE is that Snape was a tormented outsider, humiliated and violated by the "popular kids" in school. The appeal of the Death Eaters is the same appeal of the "Trenchcoat Mafia", and the Nazis. As for why he felt remorse, we don't have the details, but in truth we don't need them, really. Snape had an epiphany, where he realized that he was "better" than that, and that no matter how powerful and accepted he felt, what he was doing was wrong. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 21:14:19 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 21:14:19 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152834 > >>Potioncat: > Neither Hagrid, nor Snape are good as teachers. DD didn't choose > them for them for their teaching ability. > We get to see what a different House thinks of Hagrid, and we know > the Trio doesn't think he's a good teacher. I wish we knew what > the other Houses think of Snape. At least one non-Slytherin > student liked Snape's DADA class. > Betsy Hp: I think it's a mistake to lump Snape in with Hagrid as far as teaching ability goes. Based on Harry's NEWT Potion class in HBP either Snape's students get "Outstandings" on their OWLs in high numbers, or those who manage the required grade all want to continue with Potions. Either speaks towards Snape being an above average professor at Hogwarts. Certainly better than Hagrid, who looses all of his students as soon as they have a choice. Somewhere someone stated (I couldn't find the post, sorry) that Lupin and McGonagall where their favorite teachers. That they were examples of two good teachers. And I agree. But if I could have avoided McGonagall's classroom as a student I would have. She's the type of teacher that has always terrified me: one who uses her control of the pack as a weapon. I'd *much* rather receive an acidic dressing down from Snape than have McGonagall turn all my peers against me. Neville seems to be able to take it. McGonagall would have been my boggart, though, while I feel like I'd have been able to take Snape. Which I think brings us back to what Shaun pointed out in his post here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152343 Different students respond differently to different teaching styles. Unless I had a natural gift for Transfiguration and was therefore confident in my ability to avoid McGonagall's wrath, I'd have gritted my teeth through her classes (and either thanked my lucky stars, or bemoaned my fate depending on my sorting) and basically just tried to make it through. I'm not saying McGonagall shouldn't be a teacher. I'm not even saying that the disciplinary style she uses (shame and shunning) is horribly wrong. (Though it scares the bejeezus out of me.) Just that, for me, McGonagall is a scarier teacher than Snape, though I think they're about even on the competence scale. > >>Magpie: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152769 > > When the teacher doesn't wear the authority of a teacher, or acts > more like a peer, he's responded to as such and the class suffers. > Betsy Hp: I agree that this is exactly where Snape slips up. And that's the one area McGonagall has him beat. I'd still prefer Snape as my teacher though. Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 24 21:32:00 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 21:32:00 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152835 > Betsy Hp: > Somewhere someone stated (I couldn't find the post, sorry) that > Lupin and McGonagall where their favorite teachers. That they were > examples of two good teachers. And I agree. Alla: Me :) Maybe somebody else did, but I certainly said that. Betsy Hp: But if I could have > avoided McGonagall's classroom as a student I would have. She's the > type of teacher that has always terrified me: one who uses her > control of the pack as a weapon. I'd *much* rather receive an > acidic dressing down from Snape than have McGonagall turn all my > peers against me. Alla: Um, Snape does that too, no? He shames Neville loudly in front of his peers AND another teacher. Betsy Hp: > Different students respond differently to different teaching > styles. Alla: You see, for all hatred I feel about Snape as "teacher", I really really have no problem that if some kids and/or their parents want to inflict upon themselves his wrath that he should be their teacher. THAT is if the others, who IMO suffer badly under Snape regime have a CHOICE to study under a different teacher. If there was another Potion master ( say Slugghorn) present in Hogwarts at all time and they both teach Potions, then by all means, let Snape do whatever and those who want to study with him do the same. BUT if there is no other choice for students who cannot study under Snape because he mistreats them badly (IMO of course), then no Snape should be fired and fast, IMO. Of course I am talking in RL terms, not that Snape not needed in the story, etc. And before Shaun jumps at me :), yes I do consider the treatment that Snape dishes out upon Harry, Neville and Hermione to be that bad, that even if Snape is good for other students,something should have been done - either different potions master brought for everybody or at least for the students whom Snape torments IMO > > >>Magpie: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152769 > > > > When the teacher doesn't wear the authority of a teacher, or acts > > more like a peer, he's responded to as such and the class suffers. > > > > Betsy Hp: > I agree that this is exactly where Snape slips up. And that's the > one area McGonagall has him beat. I'd still prefer Snape as my > teacher though. Alla: Magpie this is as good place as any to thank you for your explanation. Yes, Snape often acts as their peer in the worsy way possible. I may respond to your points about Hagrid later on when I get home. JMO, Alla From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Wed May 24 21:59:59 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 22:59:59 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4474D75F.5000103@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152836 dumbledore11214 wrote: > > Betsy Hp: > But if I could have >> avoided McGonagall's classroom as a student I would have. She's > the >> type of teacher that has always terrified me: one who uses her >> control of the pack as a weapon. I'd *much* rather receive an >> acidic dressing down from Snape than have McGonagall turn all my >> peers against me. > > > Alla: > > Um, Snape does that too, no? He shames Neville loudly in front of his > peers AND another teacher. But there is a huge difference here! Whatever Snape does, it does not alienate Neville from his peers, the opposite - they feel sorry for him. When McGonagall mentions Hogsmeade permission that went straight to her, they laugh at him. When Snape takes points from Harry, it never hurts Harry's status in Gryffindor, the opposite in fact. When McGonagall takes points from them in PS, she does it in such a way that they become pariahs for a while. And Hermione? The only thing that stands between her and the label of "teachers' pet" (much more offensive than "know it all" BTW) is Snape's attitude. She should be grateful. I had to actively seek conflicts with teachers to get some acceptance "she is one of us", she gets it for free. :-) > > BUT if there is no other choice for students who cannot study under > Snape because he mistreats them badly (IMO of course), then no Snape > should be fired and fast, IMO. Then so should be Hagrid. Obviously no one is prepared to study under him voluntarily, so Dumbledore should have either hired Grubbly-Plank as an alternative, or fired Hagrid altogether. Irene From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed May 24 22:14:25 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 22:14:25 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152837 > Betsy Hp: > Based on Harry's NEWT Potion class in HBP > either Snape's students get "Outstandings" on their OWLs in high > numbers, or those who manage the required grade all want to continue > with Potions. Neri: I'm curious how did you figure that out from Harry's NEWT class? From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Wed May 24 22:19:01 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 22:19:01 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152838 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zgirnius" wrote: > For example: Snape is listening at the door. Trelawney starts > prophesying (she feels a little odd, as per her statement). The > barman, having just come up the stairs, sees Snape and > unceremoniously yanks him away after he hears the bit we have all > been told Voldemort knows. Snape and the barman struggle, and Snape > makes protestations of innocence. During this short struggle, > Trelawney completes the Prophecy. Having gained the upper hand (hey, > Snape is a skinny 20-year old, the barman has been dealing with the > colorful clientele of the Hog's Head lo these many years) the barman > throws open the door and drags Snape in to let Dumbledore know what > he has found. Trelawney, now out of her trance, sees this and > remembers it. Dumbledore is now more disposed to give her a job (hey, > she IS a Seer! and she has inside her head a hot secret Voldemort > would love to know.) Death Eater Snape heads out to report the only > part of hte prophecy he heard. I don't see a problem. Lolita: There is one problem, in my opinion. If the events went as you described them, why on earth didn't DD obliviate Snape before letting Aberforth kick him out of the pub? He could have immobilsed him, put an anti-apparition spell on him (he put it on the DEs in the Ministry in OotP, so we know that there is such a thing and that DD knows how to do it) and wiped the prophecy out of his memory. So why didn't he do it? Why did he let him escape with this crucial piece of information? zgirnius: > > 3. Snape's remorse regarding the Potter's deaths. Of course he > felt > > remorse, just as DD did. But DD insinuates Snape's remorse made him > > turn. That's likely a lie. Snape was already DDM. > > > zgirnius: > Well, I don't see the evidence, other than the possibility he knew > the whole prophecy. What evidence we have hangs together well with > the story of Snape having been in truth a Death Eater at the time he > delivered the prophecy Lolita: But of course he felt remorse! I think this one is also from RedHen: When he heard that his information led LV to James, how do you think he felt, knowing that he had a lifedebt to James, and that he had breached the contract, by being partly responsible for his death? I think that the consequences of such an act are neither innocent nor easily - if ever - righted. Cheers, Lolita :) From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed May 24 22:22:09 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 22:22:09 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: <4474D75F.5000103@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152839 > Irene: > But there is a huge difference here! Whatever Snape does, it does not > alienate Neville from his peers, the opposite - they feel sorry for him. > When McGonagall mentions Hogsmeade permission that went straight to her, > they laugh at him. > When Snape takes points from Harry, it never hurts Harry's status in > Gryffindor, the opposite in fact. When McGonagall takes points from them > in PS, she does it in such a way that they become pariahs for a while. > And Hermione? The only thing that stands between her and the label of > "teachers' pet" (much more offensive than "know it all" BTW) is Snape's > attitude. She should be grateful. I had to actively seek conflicts with > teachers to get some acceptance "she is one of us", she gets it for > free. :-) a_svirn: Hey, McGonagall has not sunk beneath all possibility of redemption yet! When she snaps at Draco and takes points from him she saves him from being Snape's pet. Alternatively when Snape sneers at Goyle he alienates him of his peers. Maybe it's even Snape's fault that Draco doesn't value Crabbe and Goyle at all. From mros at xs4all.nl Wed May 24 21:09:43 2006 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 23:09:43 +0200 Subject: What is Manipulation (was Re: Nice versus good, was: Hagrid and Snape) References: Message-ID: <000b01c67f76$60b7bb00$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 152840 Lupinlore: > I went to school in the American South. I remember > clearly when a friend from New York exploded because he thought he > had been manipulated and lied to, when the others of us (all raised > in the area) could see no such. Finally, another of my friends > simply shook his head and said "Poor Kent, he simply doesn't > understand how civilized people communicate with each other." > Exchanges that to us seemed perfectly transparent and > straightforward were to him examples of rank dishonesty. For > instance he felt misused when he found out a certain person disliked > him a lot. It was very obvious to all the rest of us that the > dislike was there and that said person had been attempting to > clearly communicate it. But somehow it didn't get through. Ah, it could be cultural of course. I'm Dutch and we are renowned (notorious!) for our blunt approach to life (we call it 'honesty' - others just call us plain rude :-). But then, my mother is just as much Dutch as I am, and she is very passive agressive - which bugs me no end! She is my mom, and I love her, but maaaaannnn...!!! Everybody who meets her agrees that she is one of the nicest, kindest persons they'd ever met. She is a Christian and as such believes in 'turning the right cheek'. But when I visit her, or phone her, she will tell *me* about all the things she found irritating, annoying or downright hurtful about people that week. And boy, does that nice, kind old lady find fault in other people! She won't tell *them*, of course, but she will squeeze her 'mental pimples' for me (not that I *want* her to, but I'm the only one she feels she can 'unload' to) It ain't pretty and it bothers me, but my mother is 73 and a widow and she's not going to change, so I will listen to her. Maybe it's how she keeps her sanity. Now, my mother is not 'evil', she truly is a nice old lady (she *is* manipulative though, of course she is: she's a mom. 'Guilt trip' anyone?), but no one, NO ONE, goes through life without being annoyed, or angry, or just in a bad mood sometimes. And sometimes people hurt you, no matter if it is unintentional. But my mom covers her irritation up with a blanket of uber-niceness. And Lupin does to. Now, it could be that Lupin is trying to compensate for being a Dark Creature. Maybe he feels he isn't allowed to be angry, or snarky, for fear of being seen as 'that nasty werewolf' ("see?! See?! I *told* you he'd go wild one day! They're all the same.." etc. etc.) But his 'niceness' is blankets over his personality so completely, the real Remus J. Lupin has become invisible. And I find that scary, to tell you the truth. More scary then somebody who'd, say, hides their shyness behind a curtain of snarkiness (*not* that I'm suggesting Severus Snape is shy! I'm just saying), or somebody who hides their insecurity behind a curtain of contrariness. Lupin's niceness is too smooth. One day, it will crack. Besides, I find Lupin manipulative in a far more subtler way. Look, It's late and tomorrow morning I'm going on a trip to Oxford for a week and I just can't be bothered to look it all up, but when Harry rants to Lupin about Snape, Lupin will always correct Harry with a 'Professor Snape'. That *seems* nice and polite, but suppose Harry would say something like "That rotten Snape exposed you as a werewolf and got you fired" (I'm making this up, remember, because I'm not in a positition to look up true quotes from the books but there are a few of these kind of conversations around) Would Lupin not be nicer and more honest when he would reply with "No Harry, I endangered the school and therefore I resigned myself" or even "I don't think Professor Snape could get me to resign if I didn't think it were for the best myself"? But in these kind of cases, Lupin (and Dumbledore) always respond with a "that's *Professor* Snape, Harry". It *sounds* like he's defending Snape, but he's really not. Reinforcing the correct title of Snape is superficial. Dumbledore does this as well, of course. Now, I adore Red Hen's essays (the only thing I don't agree with is her opinion of Lupin; I think he's a wolf in sheeps manners, she thinks he's basically a good person. We'll see) In one of her essays Red Hen calls Dumbledore and Snape's handling of Harry Potter a 'good cop/bad cop routine', and that's *so* spot on. I do think that those two play an intricate game, where one is the nasty, greasy stick and the other holds a lemon sherbet, uh, carrot, thus preparing Harry to fight Voldemort (or perhaps be a sufficient *distraction* so somebody else, near Voldemort, *cough*Snape*cough* could off him, perhaps?) In that case, Dumbledore's insistence that Harry calls Snape 'Professor' and his insistence that he trusts Snape implicitely, but his refusal to tell *why* Harry should respect or trust Snape, is understandable (although not really laudable: Dumbledore has been using and directing Harry since he was a baby) Marion From padfoot.rules at yahoo.com Wed May 24 23:00:08 2006 From: padfoot.rules at yahoo.com (Brianna Kinney) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sexy Snape ? JKR's men In-Reply-To: <20060524203822.40060.qmail@web31903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060524230008.52116.qmail@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152841 "Oded, Kerstin and Billy Kenan" wrote: I was so amazed at how many of you actually like Snape or find him attractive. BK: Me, too. I really had to restrain myself to keep from sending a one word email like, "Ewww!" and having everyone hate me forever. Kerstin: First I never really did pay that much attention to him and then I think I just kind of accepted Harry's view on him. So I can't really see anything favourable about him. BK: Well, I did take note of Snape from the very beginning. I do enjoy his character and his interactions with the others...most notably our trio. But liking his snarky wit and intelligence is quite a different thing than finding him sexy. No, sexy and Snape *together* just don't work for me. Kerstin: Now Sirius, of course, is totally an other matter. BK: On this point, I agree. I knew that Sirius was drop dead sexy even before JKR confirmed it somewhere. Kerstin: He would be by far the world's ultimate boyfriend... BK: I don't know if SB would have been boyfriend material, but he sure would have been one rollicking good time. LOL BK ~ padfoot rules because sirius black fan was taken ~ From zgirnius at yahoo.com Wed May 24 23:37:52 2006 From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (zgirnius) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 23:37:52 -0000 Subject: Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152842 > Lolita: > > There is one problem, in my opinion. If the events went as you > described them, why on earth didn't DD obliviate Snape before > letting Aberforth kick him out of the pub? He could have immobilsed > him, put an anti-apparition spell on him (he put it on the DEs in > the Ministry in OotP, so we know that there is such a thing and that > DD knows how to do it) and wiped the prophecy out of his memory. So > why didn't he do it? Why did he let him escape with this crucial > piece of information? zgirnius: My take on this is that Dumbledore does not go around Obliviating random people. Snape was a Death Eater (allegedly) at the time he heard the prophecy. But we don't have canon that Dumbledore knew it at the time. It is possible Dumbledore had no reason to suspect him (or even, reasons not to). Arguably, one could Obliviate an innocent, yet nosy passerby given the stakes, but I can see Dumbledore deciding not to do so. > Lolita: > > But of course he felt remorse! I think this one is also from RedHen: > When he heard that his information led LV to James, how do you think > he felt, knowing that he had a lifedebt to James, and that he had > breached the contract, by being partly responsible for his death? I > think that the consequences of such an act are neither innocent nor > easily - if ever - righted. zgirnius: I was not denying he felt remorse. On the contrary, I believe he did, and it provided the final reason which led him to leave the Death Eaters and join the 'good side'. Whereas Red Hen (and the always DDM! theorists more generally) believe he was already on the 'good side', so that Dumbledore was lying to Harry when he expressed his belief that Snape's remorse was the reason he returned. Unless, of course, that interrupted sentence would have ended in some other way. I don't think Red Hen makes such a suggestion in her essay, though. From estesrandy at yahoo.com Thu May 25 00:11:33 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 00:11:33 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152843 Since someone else mentioned a TV show episode in regards to Harry Potter, I felt it was acceptable to mention some things that happened in the ALIAS finale this week. If you did not see it and plan to do so, there are some spoilers below. Sydney Bristow has been called the Chosen One in the past. In this episode her dying father, (Jack Bristow) tells her that only she can face and defeat her mother. The dying father, JAck then confronts the evil Arvin Sloane who has finally attained eternal life. He realizes that Sloane can never be killed now, so the dying Jack does the next best thing. He blows up the cavern that they are both standing inside and traps Sloane in the rubble for eternity. Sloane cannot die, but cannot move to escape. I immediately thought of Dumbledore's statement that "there are worse things than death". I must confess that trapping Voldemort for all eternity in an undead state with no horcruxes and no helpers to find him would prevent Harry from having to actually kill Voldemort. I think this may be a possible ending for Book Seven. A dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, but an eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry will not have become a trained assassin as his legacy from Hogwarts. What do you think? Randy From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Thu May 25 00:45:27 2006 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 00:45:27 -0000 Subject: RAB / Amelia Bones and her murder In-Reply-To: <42e.20f7a44.31a5f902@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152844 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, grich277080 at ... wrote: > > ~aussie~: > >> Amelia Bones' death was a piece in a much bigger picture. One that > included Hepizbah Smith and James Potter as having pure blood lines > from the founders of Hogwarts. > > His search for other wizarding heirs may be a motive for kidnapping > of Florean Fortescue (HBP 6), provider of ice-cream sundaes and > ADVICE ABOUT MEDIEVAL WITCHCRAFT to Harry (POA 4). He may be reknown > a history expert and easier to grab than Professor Binns (not only > because he is in Hogwarts, but also because it is hard to grab a > ghost). (Lexicon also says a Fortescue was a past Headmaster of > Hogwarts - OOP 27) > > I think LV is not on a quest that started from Tom Riddle, but a Dark > Wizard quest inherited through the ages. I have some rough ideas it > may extend back as far as Salazar Slytherin himself. (The Basilisk > may not have been the only thing of SS locked in the Chamber of > Secrets for centuries, known only in rumours to even Professor Binns.) > > It was the 3 other founders unity in accepting Muggle-born to study > at Hogwarts that drove Slytherin away. With those heirs gone, > Salazar's heir can try to reclaim the school for pure bloods. << > > > AnnR: > This is the first time I have heard this theory re the founders and > Amelia Bones' death. Is there any canon to say that Amelia was a > Ravenclaw? Is Hepzibah Smith a Hufflepuff, I can't remember, or is > it the other way around? I know James was Gryffindor. I like the > idea of the dark wizard theory being passed through the ages before > Tom Riddle. Does anyone else think the same as aussie? > ~aussie~ Hepzibah had the Hufflepuff heirlooms which would go to the direct heir. That is also why her family searched in vain for it later. Amelia - I'll get back to you on that one. Didn't the neice have her whole family targetted in James' era? (and movie goers saw the director's daughter play Susan Bones in first 2 movies) ~aussie~ From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Wed May 24 23:30:00 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:30:00 EDT Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... Message-ID: <43a.2196f62.31a64678@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152845 PERSPECTIVE ON TEACHERS: Can I give a teacher's perspective here? I teach English Literature and Language to 11-18 yr olds. In my faculty there are various kinds of teachers. The most effective blend fear and interest. There are those who think of nothing but classroom management, they usually come across badly because the subject matter suffers for their rules, but part of that is the unpredictability of their rules because they are fearfully reactive (they know that they don't have the power). There are those who exist for fluffy compassion - they are loved but only succeed with the non-problem kids. I work within a house system, allied to one house (actually pretty much a chav equivalent of Slytherin) and teach only that house and the house which has mixed classes with them. The other two houses have different teachers. My compassion and insight is reserved for my form as there is only time to apply it there (an ideal is great but Time is the lord of all teachers). Two of us (myself being one) give out more punishments than three other teachers combined, but only to specific classes because they provide all of the hassle. Some kids like me, some kids hate me, some think that I am out for their blood - some are right. All teachers have favourites and some let this be known. All teachers have children that they would rather had never been born. All teachers are hated by some children. All teachers have some students that they will instantly look to when something goes wrong. Teachers are human and children are not complete beings who understand themselves and respond appropriately to the system (and the system is flawed, fallible and inadequate to cater to all needs). If Harry was in my class he would be in a lot of trouble, as would Draco and Ron - they do not accept their punishments, they talk back, they are off topic and focus on matters that are not class oriented. What makes a good teacher? One who gets the subject matter to penetrate their skulls in a manner that sticks - the way this is achieved may be variable or tried and tested but whatever works. Who cares really? If your kid is a little git and shouting at him will get him a C instead of a D then who would decry the shouting? Well, some do but they got Fs and work in chip shops and buy fags for their 12 year olds. Can a scary teacher be a good teacher? Most good teachers are more or less a little scary and most are a little funny but many students are too dim to realise this. Scary teachers are not always good teachers. I think that Snape is a good teacher to a certain extent. His problem is emotional personalisation - but I don't teach a subject where things explode, nor am I a spy with death hanging over my head. I'd act out a LOT if I was. Children are not all equal in potential, children cannot be saved or overtly influenced as to their character by teachers. Children are created in being and bearing according to their upbringing. Occassionally, very occassionally one gets a child who is something more, like Harry, the antithesis of the socio-educational osmosis offered since birth. They are so so rare. The abused child defecates in his pants, sets of fire alarms and steals from potential friends. The son of the bully bullies, threatens teachers, storms out of school, smokes on the premises and gets arrested during the holidays. The child of a lawyer takes charge of her drama group and stays after school for revision clubs. The child of the parent who plays it by ear and hopes it will all go well is confused and lost and never fails but never achieves their potential. Teachers do not ruin lives, nor do they ruin education. At most they will put a student off a subject; I dropped geography to avoid a creep myself - that doesn't mean that I never learnt any during my lifetime acquisition of world knowledge. For the record, Hermione would annoy the hell out of me. I had one and although she knew the answers, she was self-obsessed and the teacher has to give others their chance, no, their right to participate and communicate. One cannot always pander to the know it all, they will succeed anyway and there are others who need to be pushed, prodded and forced along the road to comprehension. I am not Snape, but I do have my moments and there are five Snapes at my school. Something to remember - if the teacher did not think that the students were capable of doing it then it wouldn't matter to them, it wouldn't irritate them. For a teacher to get wound up about a student they have to both care and believe that the student has the potential to do better than they are doing. Just a perspective! And another one is that JKR is not a teacher and the characters are meant to signify other aspects of the plotline (such as problematic partisanship), not necessarily embody a educational philosophy. smiles, Clare xx (Please don't shoot me for that being personal; how could it not be?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From steven1965aaa at yahoo.com Thu May 25 01:17:35 2006 From: steven1965aaa at yahoo.com (steven1965aaa) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 01:17:35 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152846 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Randy" wrote: > He blows up the cavern that they are both > standing inside and traps Sloane in the rubble for eternity. Sloane > cannot die, but cannot move to escape. > > I immediately thought of Dumbledore's statement that "there are > worse things than death". I must confess that trapping Voldemort > for all eternity in an undead state with no horcruxes and no helpers to find him would prevent Harry from having to actually kill > Voldemort. I think this may be a possible ending for Book Seven. A dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, but an > eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry will not have become a trained assassin as his legacy from Hogwarts. > Steven1965aaa: Good catch, I noticed that similarity as well. However, with regard to theory re: ending --- Neither can live while the other survives. From elfundeb at gmail.com Thu May 25 01:30:40 2006 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 21:30:40 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0605241830g3850533x1b3259a95c3c7618@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152847 QUESTIONS 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) would've learned about UVs? Debbie: Frankly, the whole idea that a pair of 7-year-olds would know about UVs smells like a great big Flint. Since the penalty for failing to keep a UV is death, it screams Dark Magic to me and is just not the sort of thing they would've seen at home. Nor does it seem possible that they could have gotten their information from the wireless, which wouldn't show them the handholding etc. Maybe they heard about About the only explanation I can conjure up is that at the tail end of VWI, Imperius!Arthur was forced to enter into a UV and the 3-year-old twins somehow managed to witness it ::imagines numerous twisted scenarios of what Arthur might have committed himself to do:: and then the twins, missing the death part, concluded that this would be an excellent way to get little brother to do their bidding, even better than threatening him with spiders. 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron & Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon her & Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron to F&G? Do you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing in" to Ron's love life from hers? Debbie: Is there evidence that the twins are nosing into Ginny's love life? The three of them seem like allies to me, and I sense that she gets away with stuff that Ron wouldn't. Though if Ginny were truly the Twins' heir apparent, JKR should have had her needle Ron in front of the Twins. But instead she got F&G to do her work for her. The Twins are quite effective at this sort of thing; poor Ron has no ability to respond in kind and resorts to pathetic knife-throwing; I don't think Ginny could pull it off like the twins did; she has too much fire. 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? Debbie: I don't think Fred's feelings for Molly were ever in doubt, though as I read the scene Fred's comment came as she was leaving, not after she left. It's just Fred's way of telling Molly that her distress (she turned away before responding why Percy wasn't coming) was justified. I can't give Fred much credit for this, though. IMO Fred himself should share some of the blame for driving Percy away. If Fred had shown some sensitivity toward Percy's feelings instead of publicly humiliating him back in the day, perhaps he'd be eating dinner with the family instead of paying business calls with Scrimgeour on Christmas day. 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that Snape is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to get information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No one's that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with Snape's statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been all these years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me that this is the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and the "problem" for the fandom in trying to figure out Severus Snape. *Is* he acting? When is he acting and when is he not? How good an actor is he? Is Harry correct that "even Snape" is not that good an actor? Debbie: What Carol said. 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience and/or are cruel? Debbie: Nah, this doesn't bother me at all. He doesn't seem to be hurting, just stupefied (though JKR doesn't tell us how the gnome was attached to the tree . . . .). Unless that gold paint is lead-based and toxic, that is. Gnomes aren't smart enough to be humiliated, so as far as I'm concerned they leave him up there until twelfth night. 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? Debbie: I imagine that Celestina's warbles resemble an early 20th century 78 rpm record (Alma Gluck, anyone?), which in itself might set Fleur off. More importantly, though, both of Celestina's songs concern unwilling love: the first involves a cauldron of love potion, and the second portrays a victim whose heart has been charmed away. Fleur's trademark veela power, which attracts men against their will, is a bit too much like what's going on in those songs for comfort. They are 'orrible songs because they remind her that the Weasley women have treated her as though she has stolen away Bill against his will using her veela charm. I don't blame her for trying to drown them out. She can be rude and condescending, though, so it cuts both ways. 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? Debbie: Anarchy, providing free reign to feast on all the available children, commit mayhem and otherwise avenge their pitiful treatment at the hands of wizards over the years. How else can a werewolf eat if they can't get a job? 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy couldn't stand to not see his family since they were in the neighborhood? Why or why not? Debbie: Why would she not want to believe it? She has continually demonstrated that she continues to care very much for Percy, no matter how much of a prat he may be. I think she was very touched by Scrimgeour's explanation for the visit and chose to believe it, but would react the same way even if she acknowledged that Scrimgoeur was pulling a fast one on her. This is an opportunity for her to let Percy know that her feelings haven't changed. And, maybe, to atone for having pushed him to a ministry job in the first place. And once Percy was in the door, she might have made progress but for the parsnip missiles he was pelted with after Harry went out the door. Unlike the gnome, I thought there was nothing funny about this. It was a very sad scene; an opportunity for reconciliation was lost. 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he good but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains his behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? Debbie: I cannot be persuaded to cash in my membership in P.I.N.E. (Percy Is Not Evil.) Poor Percy. His current situation springs from his unenviable position as the odd child out in the eccentric Weasley family, and the exacerbation of those differences caused by the Twins' endless teasing and Percy's inability to laugh it off. The Twins live to tease, while Percy is too sensitive to take it lightheartedly, and too much of a straight man to give it back. If the Weasleys were the Marx Brothers, Percy would be Zeppo. Nice guy, but useful only as a foil for the others' jokes. Just as Zeppo was soon dropped from the Marx Brothers films, at some point after PS/SS the Twins ceased dropping hints to Percy (such as the first Christmas dinner) that it was all in fun, and Percy became estranged from the family. Percy's alignment with the Ministry appears to be a refuge. Having always been rewarded by Molly for his dedication to her Ministry ambitions for her sons, he expected his family to be proud of his advancement at the Ministry. Given Percy's rigid approach to rules and authority, I think he was genuinely surprised and hurt by Arthur's reaction in OOP to his promotion, and genuinely thought sticking with the Ministry was the right thing to do. Despite events proving him wrong, he can't swallow his pride and still hasn't come to terms with his family's desertion of him. In this scene, Percy's refusal to look at any of the Weasleys except Molly shows that he is still badly hurt by their treatment. He is too proud to acknowledge this, of course. Molly, who always supported him and welcomes her prodigal son with open arms, gets better treatment. I'm getting into the next chapter, but the scene would be incomplete without knowing that after Harry and Scrimgeour left, Percy was pelted with parsnips from the dinner table and left in humiliation. JKR states that Fred, George and Ginny all claimed credit for the attack. The fact that Ron (another frequent target of the Twins' teasing) did not join in suggests that we should have some sympathy for Percy and not simply write him off as a prat. In this scene the prats were the adult wizards who claimed to have played a silly childish trick on a brother who took a risk merely by showing up. Did I mention that after all he's done (and however much the Twins contributed to his estrangement, Percy remains responsible for his own actions), I still like Percy? I expect great things from him in Book 7, and will be greatly disappointed if he doesn't get any action in Book 7. 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if you like. Debbie: JKR is so good at caricturing politicians bent on maintaining their own popularity in order to stay in office. Scrimgeour, however, is much more polished as a politician than Fudge ever was. Fudge was too easily swayed by his advisors. He wasn't really in control, as Umbridge showed by taking matters into her own hands in OOP. Scrimgeour, OTOH, is clearly in control of his own machinations, as his conversation with Harry shows. And his machinations are more subtle. But no less corrupt. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 02:05:27 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 02:05:27 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape. LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152848 > Magpie: > Okay, let me try to explain what I mean. First in terms of behaving > as a peer I mean anytime when the teacher sort of gives up what > should be the objective place of a teacher and fights dirty. Snape > does this with Harry. If I were in his class I would feel > uncomfortable when he picked on Harry not just because it's cruel > but because it should be beneath him as a teacher. He's not supposed > to interact with kids on that level in class and get personally > ruffled. When he does that, to me, he shows a weakness as a teacher. Alla: Right, I agree of course. Magpie: > Now, to get back to Hagrid, JKR has I think implied that one of the > reasons Snape teaches in her fictional school is that kids have to > learn to deal with people like him who exist in the world. In > Potions class the kids aren't just learning Potions but a > social/personal lesson about dealing with a person in authority who > is abusing it, or just a person in authority who is demanding and > sarcastic etc. Hagrid, imo, teaches the same kind of personal > lesson--and he teaches it inside class as well as outside, and he > began teaching it before he ever became a teacher. It has nothing > to do with Malfoy or a lack of confidence. I really can't imagine > him being any different if that first class hadn't happened. > > Hagrid on one hand has a lot of good qualities. He's also got a sort > of amazing ability to tame wild animals etc. DD says he'd trust > Hagrid with his life and I believe he means that within the context > that he is saying it. However, Hagrid is also a comic character > because in some ways he's like a big kid. He's interested in what > he's interested in, and often can't really see the big picture. Part > of knowing him, as an adult, is making allowances for this, which is > why Hagrid is often treated as if he's younger than characters > younger than he is. Charlie Weasley sternly tells Hagrid he's got > the dragon eggs counted, for instance, years after Hagrid already > got into trouble with a dragon. Harry himself has also accepted > this aspect of Hagrid. All the Trio know that Hagrid has certain > limitations they have to work around or defend or put up with. > > As a teacher what this translates to is that in his class the kids > learn to look out for themselves--I don't think it's OOC for DD to > see it that way if he thinks Snape's behavior is a learning > experience. The class is too dangerous at most times for Hagrid's > being a "joke" to mean it's a complete blow-off. He's a lesson that > sometimes you're going to be in a situation like that and the kids > have to learn it. Years after the Buckbeak incident Malfoy is still > mouthing off, but he's also very jumpy and making sure he hears all > the directions--after all, the outcome of PoA no matter what threats > he made is that he's still in this class and Hagrid is still > Hagrid. When he asks about the safety of the Thestrals, Hagrid is > not at all reassuring. > > When Hagrid teaches he's the same guy he is when he's not teaching, > and the kids all get that and react accordingly. Harry himself > loves Hagrid and respects things about him, but he still knows he > sometimes has to deal with him as a child. Hagrid hasn't changed > one way or the other since he started teaching and I really don't > think he will, because changing Hagrid in this way would be changing > the essence of Hagrid. But he fits right into the teaching staff of > Hogwarts. Had Harry never known Hagrid outside of class he could > easily have shown up as the CoMC teacher in third year and be funny, > the joke being that CoMC is the class where you might get killed > because the teacher, well-meaning as he seems, is on the monster's > side. Mostly Harry's very open about his personal affection for > Hagrid being the reason he wants him teaching. Alla: Let me just say again very loudly. I don't really dispute anything you said about Hagrid being a comic character, being treated often as a big kid, etc. As I said as a person I would greatly prefer to know him that Snape, but that is undisputed to me that Hagrid has plenty of problems as a teacher, and even though I am still hoping that he may get better as one, he may never do so. You can also be totally right that this is the lesson of Hagrid's teaching - how to look out for themselves, etc. Having said that, what I do think is that despite Hagrid's nature, despite his often treating Trio as peers, etc, etc, I think he did TRIED on his first lesson to be a teacher, NOT a peer. I think Malfoy's incident shook him and shook him badly, especially since as I also said in his youth he was already framed unfairly and that basically stopped him from having his education. Have Hagrid tried not hard enough? Maybe, but I took another look at his first lesson and I honestly think that for someone who DOES often behaves as a big child (with the big heart, but child nevertheless), he made a good faith attempt to be a teacher. If he was a more experienced teacher, he would have continued doing his best through the year, but Hagrid NEVER taught before and one Malfoy is all what it took, IMO to take away all the potential that could have been there. And again, I am not even arguing that it was necessarily been there. So, let's go to canon, shall we? Was Hagrid supposed to bring Hippogriffs to his first lesson? Surely not, NOT on the first lesson. After all as we all know they are given three XXX in Fantastic Beasts (competent wizard could cope) and it is said that expert can tame them. BUT as we also know wizarding kids become experts pretty fast, so I would say that it is not beyond the limit of imagination that wizarding teenager can successfully tame hippogriffs. And we KNOW that Harry did. Besides, Hippogriffs are not given five XXXXX, so what I am trying to say is that while Hagridd started with more dangerous animals than he should have been, he did not started with extraordinary dangerous animals, those animals were supposed to be studied later but during the third year, IMO. How do I come to this conclusion? Because of this quote: "School gov'nors have bin told, o'course," said Hagrid miserably. "They reckon I started too big. Shoulda left hippogriffs fer later... done flobberworms or summat... Jus' thought it'd make a good firs' lesson....'S all my fault..." - PoA, paperback, p.121. What I find interesting is that School governors do not say that Hagrid was not supposed to bring hippogriffs to school at all, they say that he was supposed to bring them later. Now, of course one can disagree but I somehow doubt that School governors review lessons plans for years ahead, I think they are talking about this year and this year only. So, Hagrid brought them earlier, but not THAT early as in they were supposed to study them in year seven, IMO. The man tried to make a lesson interesting. I like that he tried engaging the kids' attention. Now, of course I am of the firm opinion that Malfoy was complete and absolute brat at that lesson and has nobody to blame for being hurt but himself. The warnings were given, now in RL I would ask teacher of the dangerous class to repeat the warnings again, but I do think that in Potterverse the fact that Hagrid GAVE the warnings means that he gave sufficient ones. That is IMO of course. I really don't remember Snape repeating his instructions more than ONCE ever. I can totally be wrong, but that is my impression. So, moving on. Malfoy thinks Hippogriffs are piece of cake, he learns that it is not so, gets hurt and Hagrid carries him to the medical wing. I think in your previous post you said that your main problem with the lesson is what happened next. Because Hagrid lost control over his class, is that correct? I reread this lesson and I am very confused as to why you find Hagrid's behavior problematic, especially because Hagrid is NOT here. He carries Malfoy to the hospital wing, as IMO every responsible teacher should do, when student gets hurt in his care. I am suddenly having a flash forward to Snape saying that he sees no difference about Hermione's teeth and being praised for not PREVENTING the girl going to the hospital wing. Or, Snape seeing Harry's bloodied face and doing nothing whatsoever in HBP) Sorry, but I find Hagrid's behavior here way more resembling as to how responsible adult should behave. NOT saying that Snape SHOULD have carried Harry or Hermione to hospital wing, but that he should have definitely told them to go there. So, yes, kids wonder off because teacher is not there. I am just saying that teacher has a very GOOD reason - an injured student to not be on the lesson. After this Hagrid drinking is of course NOT teacher like behavior, but as I said earlier I think because of his inexperience and his general character too he was shaken off badly. Then of course we have the whole year of Malfoy pretending to be hurt badly (you do agree that he was pretending, right?) and trying to fire Hagrid and murder Buckbeak. I don't see how all their third year could not have affected Hagrid in the bad way. To make a long story short - Hagrid is a good person, not a good teacher, BUT I think on his first lesson he DID try. That's all I am saying and what Ron said: "That was a really bad thing to happen to Hagrid's first class, though, wasn't it?" said Ron, looking worried. "Trust Malfoy to mess up things for him" - PoA, p.119 Alla: > > BUT if there is no other choice for students who cannot study under > > Snape because he mistreats them badly (IMO of course), then no Snape > > should be fired and fast, IMO. Irene: > Then so should be Hagrid. Obviously no one is prepared to study under > him voluntarily, so Dumbledore should have either hired Grubbly- Plank as > an alternative, or fired Hagrid altogether. Alla: Um, I PARTIALLY agree in a sense that if I make RL comparison than another CoMC teacher should have been provided, BUT since I don't believe that Hagrid actively harms his students, I don't think that he should have been fired for that. I mean, if the better choice of the teacher can be found than yes, sure, but simply fire Hagrid because he harms students like Snape in my opinion harms at least some of his students, that I disagree with. JMO, Alla From puduhepa98 at aol.com Thu May 25 02:22:30 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 22:22:30 EDT Subject: DD's death Message-ID: <451.1a760c5.31a66ee6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152849 >bboyminn What is Dumbledore going to do, reappear at the last minute and save Harry? That's kind of anti-climactic. We had Harry built up as the hero in 6 books only to have Dumbledore swoop in at the end, and snatch Harry's victory from him? Doesn't seem likely. So, how and under what circumstances does Dumbledore's fake death serve the plot and the story? I can't see it. >If Dumbledore appears after the final defeat of Voldemort, I think Harry is going to feel a little betrayed. Here Dumbledore is off on a vacation, and Harry is left to fight alone. It's nice because the story ends with Dumbledore alive, but it doesn't seem pleasant from Harry's perspective. Nikkalmati: I see your point. The plot would be weakened if DD reappeared to save the day or came back from Barbados to join the celebration after the smoke cleared. I don't think that is the only possibility, however. DD may be off regenerating somewhere. If he recycles into a phoenix, he may have to start out as a child again. Another possibility, is he has to go to some other location, a super St. Mungos, to heal himself. Therefore, he would not be able to return to save the day and mess things up for Harry and he can't be blamed for leaving Harry alone to face the music. Yet he would return eventually. Niikkalmati >bboyminn >So, for now, until the last book proves otherwise, I think Dumbledore >was already dying. Snape was backed into a corner and forced to either >fight with great casualties and a very likely poor outcome, or he has >to kill Dumbledore knowing that in doing so, even under the best of >circumstances, he will be hated by the wizard world for all time. Nikkalmati: So right. The Tower scene could not have been planned. We have good reason to believe, on the other hand, that DD and SS had discussed and argued over various possibilities and that they had a notion what they would do, if worse came to worst. They must have met several times to discuss what to do about Draco and how he was proceeding. I would hope they had good reason to believe Draco was not going to harm any other students with his foolish plots. We also know that Hagrid heard them arguing near the Forbidden Forest. I assume they were outside because it was safer to talk there or was one of them going somewhere? Nikkalmati > Lanval: > And I tend to be very wary of this kind of exaggeration. There's so > much of it out in Fandom. Like those who firmly believe that the > Marauders ....... Nikkalmati: You know its really hard to counter arguments by people who don't even post on this list! Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu May 25 02:36:48 2006 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 22:36:48 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption Message-ID: <43f.1c050c3.31a67240@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152850 In a message dated 5/24/2006 2:00:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, horridporrid03 at yahoo.com writes: My goodness, it looks like the entire Potterverse is populated by "not always nice so therefore not good" people. According to the rules of karma, I guess Voldemort will win and the Potterverse will be destroyed. ------------------ Sherrie here: :::chuckle::: Betsy, thanks for a smile at the end of a long day. And I wholeheartedly agree. "Nice" and "good" definitely don't equate - and fiction is full of not-nice good people. (Forget real life - you'd be amazed at the "nice, polite" people I've met who are doing 10-20...) I can think of three fictional examples without even trying: Archibald Craven in The Secret Garden; Dr. House in the series of the same name (who I swear really IS related to my family - he's got the smarts & the snark down to a science), & Det. John Munch in Law & Order: SVU. Surly, snarky, rude, not-nice - but every one a good man. And how about Mary Poppins? She isn't really conventionally "nice", now, is she? How about King Mongkut of Siam in The King & I? Or Paul Berthalet in Carnival? Or the Beast in Beauty & the Beast? Miss Dove in one of my all-time favorite soppy films, Good Morning Miss Dove? Heck - some of Arthur's knights aren't always portrayed as Sir Sweetness & Light... (Okay, so that's more than three - I sometimes get carried away!) Nope - "nice = good" is about the same as "pretty = good" - in the words of Sportin' Life, "It ain't necessarily so..." If it was, Lucius Malfoy would be the hero of the series. Or maybe Charlie Weasley... Sherrie (who really DOES share a last name with one of the characters mentioned above) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Thu May 25 00:44:09 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 20:44:09 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 Message-ID: <41a.22ca655.31a657d9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152851 Randy: >> I think this may be a possible ending for Book Seven. A dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, but an eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry will not have become a trained assassin as his legacy from Hogwarts. What do you think? << Clare: Firstly there's the death prescriptive neither can live whilst the other does, one must die at the hand of the other (paraphrasing) stuff of prophecy. A death is required and it aint "Tom Riddle and The Philosopher's Stone". Murderer? My grandfather isn't alive anymore, so I shall take offence on his behalf. He killed a great many people during WW2, having been in most of the major battles. He polished his boots with his beret and eventually committed suicide but he WAS NOT a murderer! War is a horrific occurrence but it does occur. People kill but mostly it is not wantonly or vicariously and the act of taking a life is not always murder. Such simplistic wording is misrepresentational; it demeans the experiences of so many people in and out of war, in conflict and in danger. Taking a life is never a simple thing and does not deserve to be branded generically. There ARE murderers and one's own morals, beliefs and forgivenesses must govern the thinking on such matters. War does not equate to such discussions, neither does fighting for one's existence. We bandy around "serious" considerations in regard to what is fundamentally just a story; if we do so then those "serious" considerations must be taken seriously not with easy generics. Distinctions exist and cannot be tossed in the paper basket for the sake of an impact. An incarcerated Voldemort? Wouldn't there always be the possibility of escape or rescue? This would pave the way for a sequel, which we know is not coming or desired by the author. Such a conclusion also fails to satisfactorily deliver; it would not feel like an appropriate conclusion - it would be unfinished. The "bad guy" is not fully dealt with/punished. Then there is the Merlin precedent and he does get out of the entrapment; in a world where Merlin was historically rather than mythologically present, such a precedent could not be overlooked. Nor would it be by a referential author reliant on substantiary mythology. smiles, Clare xx From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 03:22:03 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 03:22:03 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152852 > >>Betsy Hp: > > But if I could have avoided McGonagall's classroom as a student > > I would have. She's the type of teacher that has always > > terrified me: one who uses her control of the pack as a weapon. > > > >>Alla: > Um, Snape does that too, no? > Betsy Hp: Well, no, actually. Snape will dress Neville down in *front* of his peers, but he doesn't actually invite those peers to turn on Neville to sell the point home. It seems that McGonagall routinely turns her house against those she's disciplining. She does so to Neville, Harry and Hermione, that we've seen. And she does it with such ease that it seems to be quite natural. As Snape's acid wit is natural to him. Obviously, Neville, Hermione and Harry aren't overly affected by such treatment. But that sort of thing really bothers me. So I'd have lived in constant fear of angering McGonagall in a way I wouldn't have feared Snape. Different strokes for different folks. > >>Alla: > You see, for all hatred I feel about Snape as "teacher", I really > really have no problem that if some kids and/or their parents want > to inflict upon themselves his wrath that he should be their > teacher. > THAT is if the others, who IMO suffer badly under Snape regime > have a CHOICE to study under a different teacher. > Betsy Hp: So you'd want someone like me to have another Transfiguration teacher to choose from, right? I wonder if I'd have done it though? Because again, McGonagall *is* a good teacher. She really knows her subject, just as Snape knows his. Also, not much like life, really. I'm sure Fleur would have prefered a different mother-in- law (and Molly a different daughter-in-law) if she had the ability to choose. That's the thing. It's impossible to choose the people you'll run into in life. And sometimes it's the folks you'd least like to be around that have something you want enough (or need enough) to put up with them. Fleur puts up with Molly because she loves Bill. Neville deals with Snape because he wants to graduate from Hogwarts. Draco puts up with Hagrid for the same reason. Betsy Hp From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 03:40:41 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 03:40:41 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152853 > Betsy Hp: > Well, no, actually. Snape will dress Neville down in *front* of his > peers, but he doesn't actually invite those peers to turn on Neville > to sell the point home. It seems that McGonagall routinely turns > her house against those she's disciplining. She does so to Neville, > Harry and Hermione, that we've seen. And she does it with such ease > that it seems to be quite natural. As Snape's acid wit is natural > to him. Alla: When does Mcgonagall LITERALLY invite other students to turn on those she disciplines? I mean, it is a POSSIBILITY that this will happen, sure, but I see no indication in the books and at this late hour I may have forgotten some canon, but I don't remember her saying - please, tear Neville to shreds, guys or something to that effect. She certainly dresses him down for loosing the passwords for example, but invite others to do it to Neville? And that is IMO exactly what happens when Snape humiliates Neville in front of other students and Lupin. Snape does not invite anybody to say "Oh, Neville, you are such an idiot, you don't do well in Snape's class", but that is a distinct possibility, IMO. And of course the important thing to me when we compare Snape and Mcgonagall's treatment of Neville is that while Mcgonagall is CERTAINLY guilty of mistreating Neville on two occasions IMO ( that I remember), she also praises him ( there is nothing wrong with your work but the lack of confidence). THAT Snape never does and that is why I think that his treatment of Neville is much worse. Betsy: > Obviously, Neville, Hermione and Harry aren't overly affected by > such treatment. But that sort of thing really bothers me. So I'd > have lived in constant fear of angering McGonagall in a way I > wouldn't have feared Snape. Different strokes for different folks. Alla: Sure. > Betsy Hp: > So you'd want someone like me to have another Transfiguration > teacher to choose from, right? Alla: If you wanted to, yes absolutely. Betsy Hp: I wonder if I'd have done it though? > Because again, McGonagall *is* a good teacher. She really knows her > subject, just as Snape knows his. Also, not much like life, > really. I'm sure Fleur would have prefered a different mother-in- > law (and Molly a different daughter-in-law) if she had the ability > to choose. > > That's the thing. It's impossible to choose the people you'll run > into in life. And sometimes it's the folks you'd least like to be > around that have something you want enough (or need enough) to put > up with them. Fleur puts up with Molly because she loves Bill. > Neville deals with Snape because he wants to graduate from > Hogwarts. Draco puts up with Hagrid for the same reason. Alla: Well, sure in life we cannot always pick and choose the people we communicate with, but I am of the opinion that in SCHOOL, which while in some way I agree supposed to be preparation for life, children are NOT supposed to suffer needlessly because of bad teachers and while it is not always possible to find the better one ( teacher I mean), it is OFTEN possible to deal with bad teachers IMO as in removing them. Of course I am running off the RL aspect again, story without Snape is not a story, but since I like RL metaphors, I think DD was very wrong by not doing anything about him,that is of course if he would not have to deal with responsibilities of the Headmaster and Leader of the Phoenix. As I said previously, I DO see a lesson for Harry to learn from Snape, but that is never to be like him, never ever. I suspect that this will turn into Harry granting forgiveness to the man who hurt him IMO so badly aand that would be a great contrast to Snape who still cannot let go his grudges against the dead man. JMO, Alla From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Thu May 25 04:13:40 2006 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 00:13:40 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: Defense of Snape in POA. Was:Re: Snape, Apologies, a... Message-ID: <3b1.2742b8c.31a688f4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152854 In a message dated 5/24/06 3:46:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bawilson at citynet.net writes: > > One thing I noticed when I re-read PS/SS was that the Dursleys were trying > to keep Harry from his wizardling heritage because they considered it > DANGEROUS. It seems that, as mean and wrongheaded as they were, they are > trying to protect him. Sandy now: I have been very tempted to respond to many of the current topics but since I can never seem to pass muster with the list elves I have remained in lurkdom. This statement, however, brings me out. Do you REALLY think the Dursleys are trying to protect Harry? I don't see it that way at all. I have no doubt that the Dursleys think Harry's magical heritage is dangerous, but not to Harry but rather to them. They are worried that their precious neighbors will find out and they will be treated like lepers. Considering the circumstances that brought Harry to them I'm sure they're plenty worried something likewise could happen to them. They worry that Harry himself may bring some kind of magical disaster upon them like, say, blowing up their house. I'm sure, despite the estrangement between Lily and Petunia, they had to be at least aware that there was a wizarding war going on, which was confirmed when Harry landed on their door step. Keep in mind Vernon's reaction when Harry told him Voldemort was back in Phoenix. And, of course, they were worried that some harm would come to their precious Dudley as a result of Harry's magic. That, too, came to pass in Phoenix. If there is one question I want answered in book 7 it is WHY the Dursleys took Harry in. To me, that is the biggest mystery of all. Yes, they thought magic was dangerous, and they were scared shitless of it, but they were scared for themselves, not for Harry. The only thing they ever did to protect Harry was take him in, and I don't understand why they did. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 05:21:53 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 05:21:53 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and Fudge (Was: Lupin and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152855 Pippin wrote: > Snape was unconscious during Lupin's transformation and escape into the forest, yet Dumbledore knew about it by the time he spoke to Harry in the Hospital Wing. The only person who could have told Dumbledore is Sirius Black. > > And since Snape was not present for that interview, the only way > Snape could have learned that Lupin was at large on the grounds > was from Dumbledore. Dumbledore also must have told Fudge > about it, since we hear that he convinced Fudge that Lupin > had not gone out to the shack to help Black. Carol responds: One thing that confuses me. I had thought that Fudge informed his Senior Undersecretary Delores Umbridge after the events in PoA that Dumbledore was hiring "werewolves" and that she framed her antiwerewolf legislation at that point as a means of undermining DD's reforms, but according to Sirius Black (OoP Am. ed. 302), Umbridge framed her legislation "two years ago" (as of September 8, Lexicon chronology), which means that it must have been passed shortly after Lupin began teaching at Hogwarts or just before he was hired. Maybe the legislation was one reason why DD hired Lupin for what he knew would be a one-year position (because of the DADA jinx/curse).(?) At any rate, Umbridge's antiwerewolf legislation can't be aimed specifically at either Lupin or Dumbledore given that chronology, nor can it have any connection with Snape's malicious little revelation to his students after Lupin's resignation. The legislation predates these events by almost a year, and it does not seem to be aimed, like Umbridge's attempt to sack Hagrid, at undermining Dumbledore through attacks on his known associates (unless Umbridge somehow knew that Lupin was a werewolf before Fudge told her, which seems unlikely). More likely, it's merely a manifestation of her anti-"half breed" mania which happens, inconveniently, to affect Lupin a year after its inception. However, I do wonder whether Umbridge is the malign influence behind Fudge's metamorphosis from the bumbling but well-intentioned figure we see in PoA to the paranoid and power-hungry politician of OoP (pardon the alliteration.) We know from "The Hearing" in OoP that Fudge moved very quickly from being merely bewildered by Dumbledore's "insane" declaration that Voldemort was back to fearful that Dumbledore was out to replace him as MoM, and from being friendly toward Harry to willing to expel him, break his wand, and even send him to Azkaban for underage magic. Umbridge played a prominent role in Harry's hearing and she sent the Dementors after him in the first place to silence or discredit him. Could Umbridge also have played a role in having DD removed from his high offices on the Wizengamot and International Confederation of Wizards? Was Fudge already under her influence even during GoF, before Voldemort's return? Posters have suggested, in fact, Harry himself suggests, that Fudge was Imperio'd by Lucius Malfoy or at least that Malfoy is responsible for the alteration in Fudge between PoA/GoF and OoP. Certainly Malfoy seems to have been attempting to influence Fudge, but his real motive in being at the Ministry on the day of Harry's hearing may have had more to do with Imperioing whichever Order member was guarding the door to the Department of Mysteries, probably Sturgis Podmore, who is arrested soon afterwards. (Malfoy glances toward the door to the DoM twice in that chapter, a detail I hadn't noticed until a recent rereading of OoP, and Mr. Weasley makes a point of telling Sirius Black that Fudge was talking to Malfoy on level nine, the level of the DoM, another detail I hadn't noticed until this time around.) At any rate, I suspect that Malfoy is a red herring here, and the malign influence on Fudge is Umbridge's (which is not to say that Malfoy is not working for his own ESE! ends, as he certainly is). But Umbridge's close connection to Fudge and her later stint as High Inquisitor at Hogwarts, makes her, IMO, the most likely person to have turned Fudge's fear of Voldemort's return into anti-Dumbledore paranoia. Carol, noting that Umbridge is Fudge's Senior Undersecretary and Percy is his Junior Assistant, and wondering if Umbridge is also responsible for, erm, brainwashing Percy From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu May 25 05:29:45 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 05:29:45 -0000 Subject: What is Manipulation (was Re: Nice versus good, was: Hagrid and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152856 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > So let's focus on one issue you bring up -- the charge of being manipulative. I think this is important because it shows up with regard to DD as well -- in fact, it's hard to have any mention of DD without it showing up. > > What is manipulative? What about DD and Lupin lead people to > suspect that they may be being manipulative? > > Is it being nice and getting what you want from other people? I > suppose it depends. I would say that manipulation occurs when there is miscommunication. That is, when one person thinks "Oh, this is the nicest guy," and the other is thinking "Oh, now to get what I want." In other words, manipulation occurs when a lie is involved. > Tonks: According to Dictionary.com Manipulation is "exerting shrewd or devious influence especially for one's own advantage" Manipulation does not necessary involve a lie. Any good salesman or mental health therapist uses manipulation. The therapist don't like to be accused of it, but just because it is in the other person's best interest doesn't IMO mean that it isn't manipulation. I think the operational word here is "shrewd". A good therapist or hypno-therapist does this when they set up the client to do a certain action. The therapist can just think that they are good at what they do, or again IMO, if you are honest with yourself you have to admit that not only are you real good at what you do, but you are manipulating the client. It is for his/her own good, in agreement with what they say that they want the outcome of their therapy to be, but still it is done on a subconscious level, the conscious mind of the client does not know what is "really" happening. That, as I say IMO, is manipulation. And there is nothing wrong with it. When there is something wrong with it would be when it does involve a lie. Before I became a therapist, I was a sales rep. for a number of different companies/products that were sold to the general public. I loved to "play mental chess" with people when I tried to sell them a product. I liked to compete with other sales reps for the top position in the company too. And I would say "any fool can lie they way to the top, there is no skill or glory in that!" And for me, there would be no fun in that either. There are many people who use their charm and skill with words to take advantage of other people; that is wrong. DD does not do that, and I love his style!! He is smooth, he is a master! But he does not lie, and he does not take advantage of others for his own selfish benefit. He is very shrewd. (Characterized by keen awareness, sharp intelligence, and often a sense of the practical. Disposed to artful and cunning practices according to Dictonary.com) A word about communication styles. It is true that upper middle class society is rather indirect and lower social classes are IMO more direct. You know where you stand and people call a spade a spade in the working classes. (Snape is a good example.) If you move up to a more "polite" class you have to get use to what seems "deceptive practices". You have to be able to read what the person is saying behind what they are saying. And this takes some getting use to if one is raised in a working class family, goes to college and then interacts with a different social group. I still think that most people are too "politically correct' and it feels to me like they are lying by not saying what they really think. But this isn't manipulation, it is just a difference in communication styles. I think manipulation has to begin with the manipulator knowing that they are trying to get a particular result by what they are doing. (Although some of us are so good at it that it just becomes second nature and we forget that we are doing it. We think that we are just very persuasive.) Harry manipulates Slughorn when he helps him get the spider venom and then gets him drunk to get the information about the memory. Everyone manipulates. Children and dogs are masters at it. Manipulation in itself is not good or evil, it depends on how you use it and what you do with it. As to Lupin. I like Lupin. Other than his `furry little problem' he would be a good friend. He is nice and good both. I don't see him as evil in any way. I tend to be rather dominate so a passive person is my kind of person. If I want to do something and ask you to come along and you might rather do something else but say yes anyway and never tell me that you want to do Y instead, so what! I have had these discussions with friends in the past "if you really hate doing X, tell me!!" That is what gets me, when they really hate something and do it anyway. But if they really don't care one way or the other and just want to come along to be with me.. me me. That is OK. Lupin is like a good dog. (I hate cats.) Tonks_op From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu May 25 05:43:47 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 05:43:47 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152857 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: Not snipping this opening for a reason: > > Lanval: > > Last night watching 'House, MD', there was an exchange between > > House and a "patient" (don't want to go into details here, with > > those in mind who haven't yet seen it, or those who aren't > > familiar with the show). And these lines made me think: > > "People aren't tactful and polite just because it's nice. They do > > it because they've got an ounce of humility. Because they know > > they will make mistakes and they know that their actions have > > consequences. And they know that those consequences are their > > fault." > > > > I don't really agree with the last statement, but on the whole it > > makes a good case for being the right kind of 'nice'. Leslie: > Yes, but I don't think it's accurate either. "Niceness" doesn't > spring at all from any sort of humility. I think "niceness" (and > manners, etc.) spring from a desire to do what is socially correct, > and be socially accepted as a result. What we have here, people, is a failure to communicate. Alla, Lanval, Lupinlore and myself are thinking of 'niceness' in a much different way than Betsy, Leslie, et al. For one thing, I suspect all of us are properly contemptuous of 'fake' niceness. What has been said about goodness can also apply to being nice--to genuinely DO it and to be it requires a lot of effort. It is indeedy harder to be kind to people, to not go for the jugular when you could but to even be mindful of their thoughts and feelings and situations. And if you take a view of morality that is deeply interested in the methods by which people carry out their actions as well as what the actions are and what the intentions are, being 'nice' suddenly assumes a lot more importance. > Not a reason for him to be humble, really. Any attempt at such > would only ring false. And though Snape may not be "humble," > neither is he a show-off. On the other hand, he does tend to have a kind of invincible belief in his own perceptions of a situation being the right one. Witness his screaming fit both in the Shack and afterwards, which basically amounts to a Tom Cruise-esque "I know what's going on here, Hermione, you don't--don't be facile!" The irony is intentional, I'm sure. > Leslie41: > > But I don't think he loved her. That's a romantic idea but not to > my mind a logical one. Don't discount that it could come up in a distinctly creepy, dare I even say EWWWW-inspiring way. (Look it up in Hypothetic Alley.) > Leslie41: > I think all the explanation we need for Snape JOINING the DE is > that Snape was a tormented outsider, humiliated and violated by > the "popular kids" in school. The appeal of the Death Eaters is > the same appeal of the "Trenchcoat Mafia", and the Nazis. I think we need a little bit more, given that the public front of the DEs was all about the blood thing (as we're told with Regulus joining up), and as noted above, in Snape's case, the irony burns. Of course, the Trenchcoat Mafia is also an interesting parallel IF you want to go there, given their scorn, hatred, and utter disdain for everyone else at the school and life in general. > As for why he felt remorse, we don't have the details, but in truth > we don't need them, really. Snape had an epiphany, where he > realized that he was "better" than that, and that no matter how > powerful and accepted he felt, what he was doing was wrong. Assuming that he's not ESE!. -Nora hopes that this sunny (but COLD!!!!) weather lasts and looks up train schedules From greatraven at hotmail.com Thu May 25 09:07:00 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 09:07:00 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape ? JKR's men In-Reply-To: <20060524230008.52116.qmail@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Brianna Kinney wrote: > > "Oded, Kerstin and Billy Kenan" wrote: > > I was so amazed at how many of you actually like Snape or find him attractive. > > BK: > Me, too. I really had to restrain myself to keep from sending a one word email like, "Ewww!" and having everyone hate me forever. > > Kerstin: > First I never really did pay that much attention to him and then I think I just kind of accepted Harry's view on him. So I can't really see anything favourable about him. > > BK: > Well, I did take note of Snape from the very beginning. I do enjoy his character and his interactions with the others...most notably our trio. But liking his snarky wit and intelligence is quite a different thing than finding him sexy. No, sexy and Snape *together* just don't work for me. > > Kerstin: > Now Sirius, of course, is totally an other matter. > > BK: > On this point, I agree. I knew that Sirius was drop dead sexy even before JKR confirmed it somewhere. > > Kerstin: > He would be by far the world's ultimate boyfriend... > > BK: > I don't know if SB would have been boyfriend material, but he sure would have been one rollicking good time. LOL > > > BK > ~ padfoot rules because sirius black fan was taken ~ Sue here: I think a lot of us simply find the character interesting because he's so complex. I agree I wouldn't like him much in real life, but as a fictional character, he's fun to analyse. Mind you, there ARE those out there who have different ideas ... there are quite a few Snape Mary Sue tales in the various fan fiction archives. I read one myself and it was a hoot! As for Sirius, again, an interesting character, tragic, yes, but a boyfriend?!? Eeuw! Not for me, thank you! :-) If it was the teenage Sirius, you'd be constantly telling him to grow up and, for chrissakes, stop hanging out with that idiot James Potter. If he was the adult Sirius, post Azkaban, he'd be far too moody for my taste. Ah, well, each to her own. Personally, I'd rather go out with Lupin, as long as he had his medicine along. > From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Thu May 25 10:15:07 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 10:15:07 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152859 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Randy" wrote: Randy: > Sloane cannot die, but cannot move to escape. > I immediately thought of Dumbledore's statement that "there are > worse things than death". I must confess that trapping Voldemort > for all eternity in an undead state with no horcruxes and no helpers > to find him would prevent Harry from having to actually kill > Voldemort. I think this may be a possible ending for Book Seven. A > dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, but an > eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry will not have > become a trained assassin as his legacy from Hogwarts. > > What do you think? Geoff: I do not know the programme to which Randy has referred to, but while I was reading this post, another example crossed my mind. And it's our good friend Tolkien again. If you are only famliar with LOTR and not the earlier events in Middle-Earth, let me just outline that when Il?vatar created Middle-Earth the greatest of the angelic beings (Ainur) was Melkor (He who arises in might). He rebelled and came to Middle-Earth to try to make it his domain and became Morgoth (The black enemy), who took Sauron to be his greatest lieutenant. At the end of the first age, the Valar came to the assistance of the peoples of Middle-Earth and the gerat fortress of Thangorodrim was captured: "There Morgoth stooad at last at bay and yet unvaliant. He fled into the deepest of his mines and sued for peace and pardon; but his feet were hewn from under him and he was hurled upon his face. There he was bound with the chain Angainor which he had worn aforetime and his iron crown they beat into a collar for his neck and his head was bowed upon his knees..." (Silmarillion "The Voyage of E?rendil") ...and when things had been sorted out after the battle... "But Morgoth himself the Valar thrust through the Door of Night beyond the Walls of the World, into the Timeless Void; and a guard is set for ever on those walls and E?rendil keeps watch upon the r amparts of the sky." (ibid.) To me, this would seem to be something worse than death, On the subject of the prophecy - yet again! I do not think that one of the two dying is absolutely necessary because the prophecy - like the Delphic utterances - is vague. The phrase over which so much bandwidth has been used in the last couple of years or so says... "...and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives..." but... What are Voldemort and Harry both doing at the moment and have been since Sybill said her piece some fifteen years before? Both are alive and surviving. So. What will cause the prophecy to become true? At the moment it hasn't been fuflilled and its requirements are being shown to be wrong day by day. Is it referring to some unspecified future date? Something akin to Morgoth's fate overtaking Voldemort would get Harry off the hook of becoming a murderer. Short of this, there must be fates worse than death which could rise up to frighten Voldemort - a Dementor's kiss maybe? Or would there be spells a strong as those surrounding Morgoth to keep Tom well and truly under wraps for good? From a_svirn at yahoo.com Thu May 25 10:58:29 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 10:58:29 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152860 > Alla: > > When does Mcgonagall LITERALLY invite other students to turn on > those she disciplines? I mean, it is a POSSIBILITY that this will > happen, sure, but I see > no indication in the books and at this late hour I may have > forgotten some canon, but I don't remember her saying - please, tear > Neville to shreds, guys or something to that effect. > > She certainly dresses him down for loosing the passwords for > example, but invite others to do it to Neville? a_svirn: "Dresses him down" is certainly one way of putting it. What she actually did should be more appropriately called "vented her frustrations on a convenient target". It's not just that she was betrayed into calling her chargers "abysmally foolish persons". *That* would be a "dressing down". But she didn't stop at that, did she? She was "furious" with him, banned him from all future Hogsmeade visits, gave him a detention, and forbade "anyone to give him the password into the tower. Poor Neville was forced to wait outside the common room every night for somebody to let him in, while the security trolls leered unpleasantly at him." So you see, McGonagall didn't just punish Neville by assigning a detention, she humiliated him further by exposing his memory problems for public ridicule. And in doing so she certainly put other Gryffindors in a position where they had their share in chastising Neville. And all that for something that wasn't his even fault! Because for one thing Neville did *not* loose his passwords. They were stolen from him. But did she pause even for an instant to consider the possibility? And that was exactly what she *should* have done as person responsible for the students' safety! *Snape*, by the way , was perfectly right when he said that Black couldn't get in without help, even if he did not mean Crookshanks at the time. But it's easer to blame Neville, than to actually admit to the possibility of having a "fifth column" in Hogwarts. That way Hogwarts administration wouldn't look so helpless and incompetent, would it? And even if it *had* been Neville's fault, the way she punished him was absolutely unacceptable. Because she did "invite", as you put it, other students to discipline him simply by making him dependant on their goodwill. Not to mention that the problem should not have arisen at all, if only McGonagall appreciated the difficulties Neville had been having and helped him in some tactful and discrete way. Simply letting the Fat Lady know that if Neville forgot a password he should be admitted anyway would have sufficed. But not for McGonagall bending rules for someone who has problems. It's OK to bend (if not actually break) them so that Harry can be the youngest seeker in a century, or her star pupil would become even more of a star. But for someone like Neville? Why bother? >Alla: > And of course the important thing to me when we compare Snape and > Mcgonagall's treatment of Neville is that while Mcgonagall is > CERTAINLY guilty of mistreating Neville on two occasions IMO ( > that I remember), she also praises him ( there is nothing wrong with > your work but the lack of confidence). THAT Snape never does and > that is why I think that his treatment of Neville is much worse. a_svirn: You call this praise? Merlin forbid, anyone would ever praise me like this; I would probably retaliate with something politically incorrect. Besides Snape gave the same tepid encouragement in his first OWL class: "Moronic though some of this class undoubtedly are, I expect you to scrape an "Acceptable" in your OWL, or suffer my displeasure.' His gaze lingered this time on Neville, who gulped." Compare to McGonagall': "I see no reason why everybody in this class should not achieve an OWL in Transfiguration as long as they put in the work.' Neville made a sad little disbelieving noise. 'Yes, you too, Longbottom,' said Professor McGonagall. There's nothing wrong with your work except lack of confidence". To quote Snape again, "I see no difference". If the latter can be considered praise, so can the former. From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Thu May 25 11:16:54 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 12:16:54 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060525111654.77155.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152861 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > She certainly dresses him down for loosing the > passwords for > example, but invite others to do it to Neville? Of course she does. Every time someone has to let Neville in or out, that's extra humiliation and invitation for teasing. > > And of course the important thing to me when we > compare Snape and > Mcgonagall's treatment of Neville is that while > Mcgonagall is > CERTAINLY guilty of mistreating Neville on two > occasions IMO ( > that I remember), she also praises him ( there is > nothing wrong with > your work but the lack of confidence). You consider that to be praise?! Oh my God. Oh, the memories of "You'd be such a beautiful girl if only you lost couple of pounds". Let me tell you - no child or teenager takes this kind of "praise" as a compliment. Oh, and no need to tease me about McGonagall's hopes of redemption (was not you, was someone else in this thread) - I don't consider a little cruel streak to be a mortal sin for a good teacher. ;-) > children are NOT supposed to suffer needlessly > because of bad > teachers and while it is not always possible to find > the better one > ( teacher I mean), it is OFTEN possible to deal with > bad teachers > IMO as in removing them. Don't you see the contradiction? If you can't find your ideal teacher, the one that will be right for all the N children at school, what's the point in removing a teacher that's all right for N-2 children? Irene ___________________________________________________________ Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo! Mail - quick, easy and free. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/trueswitch2.html From mros at xs4all.nl Thu May 25 08:04:52 2006 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 10:04:52 +0200 Subject: Hermione and Snape WAS:Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers. References: <43a.2196f62.31a64678@aol.com> Message-ID: <000601c67fd1$e7421d40$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 152862 Clare: > For the record, Hermione would annoy the hell out of me. I had one and > although she knew the answers, she was self-obsessed and the teacher has > to give > others their chance, no, their right to participate and communicate. One > cannot always pander to the know it all, they will succeed anyway and > there are > others who need to be pushed, prodded and forced along the road to > comprehension. Oh, hear! Hear! Hermione soooo irritates me. I don't think she's particularly bright either. I'm a member of Mensa, and my experience (and those of my fellow clubmembers) is that really intelligent children either do their own quiet thing or 'play dumb' to fit in the crowd. I'm all for more attention to the bright child (raise the bar high!) but that's because they generally don't *demand* time while they do need it. Children like Hermione, whose only aim in life seems to be to impress adults (and what *is* her thing with faillure? I'd like to speak with her parents. Amazing too that she often ops to spend holidays away from them too, but I digress), children like Hermione *needs* to be slapped down occasionally. They can take it (they wouldn't be such a gloryhound "look-at-me" irritating little know-it-alls if they were fragile little butterflies, would they?) Snape is *good* for her. Although I fear that miss Granger has too thick a skin to ever *learn* from the experience. gotta run, plane to catch marion From drednort at alphalink.com.au Thu May 25 12:33:40 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 22:33:40 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: <20060525111654.77155.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: Message-ID: <447630C4.8395.144C441@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152863 On 25 May 2006 at 12:16, Irene Mikhlin wrote: > Don't you see the contradiction? If you can't find > your ideal teacher, the one that will be right for all > the N children at school, what's the point in removing > a teacher that's all right for N-2 children? Shaun: And especially when you can't rule out the possibility that for some of those other children, the teacher may not just be 'all right' but may actually be particularly good for them. Judging a teacher only on the students that their methods don't work for is a very bad way of judging a teacher. All teachers fail with some children. That's a reality - there are no perfect teachers. Some fail abysmally with some children and triumph with others. Why should the children they fail with be given a higher priority than the children they triumph with? What is so special about Neville Longbottom that means every other students education has to be changed so he doesn't have to deal with Snape? On 25 May 2006 at 3:40, dumbledore11214 wrote: > > Betsy Hp: > > So you'd want someone like me to have another Transfiguration > > teacher to choose from, right? > > Alla: > > If you wanted to, yes absolutely. Shaun: There's a couple of problems with that, though. First of all, all indications are that at Hogwarts, each subject normally only has one teacher - the sole exception I can think of is when the school winds up with two Divination teachers. In such a situation, you can't offer students a choice of teacher - in an ideal world, in an ideal school, you might be able to make that offer. But in a school where you only have one teacher teaching a subject, that's not an option. But secondly, children aren't always capable of making this type of judgement. Just because a child doesn't like being in a particular class doesn't mean it's not the best place for them to be. Now, I happen to agree that it would probably be better for Neville that he not be in classes with Snape, so in his specific case, I wouldn't have a problem with him being able to choose an alternative if there was one - but generally speaking you can't let children make these choices for themselves. It's not as simple as if the child 'wants to' change. There's also the issue that we know it's hard to fill the DADA post at Hogwarts - it may well be difficult to fill some other teaching posts as well. It's not always possible to get the teachers you want. 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 puduhepa98 at aol.com Thu May 25 13:13:11 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 09:13:11 -0400 Subject: Peeves Message-ID: <8C84E141BB3F413-1964-9D8@FWM-D44.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152864 >Najwa said >People who die unhappy become ghosts right? Or is it people that are >afraid to die become ghosts? If so, then why are there poltergeists >like Peeves? Did he die in an angry manner? Nikkalmati: I've seen other listees refer to Peeves as a ghost, but I am not sure if there is any canon for that. I always thought a poltergeist is a different kind or creature entirely, not someone who was once alive. Is there some evidence in the books to the contrary? Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 13:33:28 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:33:28 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: <20060525111654.77155.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152865 > --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > > > She certainly dresses him down for loosing the > > passwords for > > example, but invite others to do it to Neville? Irene: > Of course she does. Every time someone has to let > Neville in or out, that's extra humiliation and > invitation for teasing. Alla: You know, I thought about it and I agree. I mean I said already that Mcgonagall treated Neville very badly twice, but yes, Ia gree she does, still see no difference between what Snape does and still think that Snape is far ahead by quantity of abuse, but yes. Alla: > > And of course the important thing to me when we > > compare Snape and > > Mcgonagall's treatment of Neville is that while > > Mcgonagall is > > CERTAINLY guilty of mistreating Neville on two > > occasions IMO ( > > that I remember), she also praises him ( there is > > nothing wrong with > > your work but the lack of confidence). Irene: > You consider that to be praise?! Oh my God. > Oh, the memories of "You'd be such a beautiful girl if > only you lost couple of pounds". Let me tell you - no > child or teenager takes this kind of "praise" as a > compliment. Alla: Well, I in my teenager years would consider this a praise and yes, the "compliment" you brought up unfortunately hits home, but I think your analogy is flawed, because Mcgonagall does not tell Neville that he needs to change anything in him, she does not tell him that he is clumsy idiot, or moronic, but that his work IS good, except he lacks confidence. I don't know how explain it better, but after this praise my confidence would go up. Okay, maybe it is not full blown compliment, but IMO it is atruthful assesment meaning to inspire such. > On 25 May 2006 at 12:16, Irene Mikhlin wrote: > > > Don't you see the contradiction? If you can't find > > your ideal teacher, the one that will be right for all > > the N children at school, what's the point in removing > > a teacher that's all right for N-2 children? > Alla: No, I truly don't. The only reason I started to talk about hiring another teacher in addition to Snape is to address the needs of hypothetical children for whom Snape can be good, what I do see happening is Snape actively harming some children and for that again in RL context I don't think he should be teaching them. > Shaun: > All teachers fail with some children. That's a reality - there are no perfect teachers. Some fail > abysmally with some children and triumph with others. > > Why should the children they fail with be given a higher priority than the children they triumph > with? > > What is so special about Neville Longbottom that means every other students education has > to be changed so he doesn't have to deal with Snape? > Alla: As I said in the past, Shawn, I am talking about extreme cases of harm only. I know on that we disagree, but that's how I feel. If the choice is between majority getting the teacher which is good for them and several students ending up permanently harmed as the result, I prefer majority not getting the teacher which is good for them. I always bring the example of teacher giving perfect education to forty students and let's say killing one of them. I do NOT think that such teacher should be allowed to teach. That is of course that to me it is questionable at least that Snape is good for majority of students, although he very well could be. > Shaun: > > But secondly, children aren't always capable of making this type of judgement. Just because > a child doesn't like being in a particular class doesn't mean it's not the best place for them to > be. Now, I happen to agree that it would probably be better for Neville that he not be in > classes with Snape, so in his specific case, I wouldn't have a problem with him being able to > choose an alternative if there was one - but generally speaking you can't let children make > these choices for themselves. It's not as simple as if the child 'wants to' change. > Alla: Sure, as I said choosing here means involving child parents, etc, but let's say if child has permanent nightmares as a result of being in this teacher's class ( like to me this represents Neville's Boggart), then yes, I think something must be done here. Oh, and you don't think that Harry's case is rather clear too? The teacher has a grudge against the boy's parents and torments him because of that. I don't know I think Harry should be allowed to run away from this class as far as possible. But again, I perfectly get that in context of Hogwarts it is not going to happen and that would be a different story. But do I think that Dumbledore OWED Harry and Neville to do something about Snape. JMO, Alla From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu May 25 13:43:36 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:43:36 -0000 Subject: What's fun about the HPs? (was: Request for new topics) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152866 > SSSusan: > > Am I in a small minority of people who still actually LIKES Harry > himself? ::huffs on D'oH shield and glances at it sentimentally:: > > How 'bout we -- without succumbing to a series of just one-liners -- > talk about what we LOVE about the books? what we find FUN about > them, even after all this time? > Potioncat: First, I'd like to thank SSSusan for starting this fun thread (and its spinoffs) about what's fun about the HPs. The HP experience is more than reading a book. None of us have read the book, thought how good it was and just set it down. there has been so much more. Researching the clues has been one of the fun activities. In the past there have been threads that have had many list members brushing up on mythology and folklore, or history, or various meanings of words and names, studying geograhy and maps of England or learning more about animals for animagus clues. For Merlin's sake, I was even tied up in knots looking for a clue to Theodore Nott (there is such a thing as a Theodore Knot aka Fiodore Knot)Looking for such knowledge-- OK--trivia, has been fun. Some of the word play or clues are based on something else.Getting it the first time has been a real thrill...or I think it would be if I ever did... Another series that has some these same qualities is the "Series of Unfortunate Events." I've read it to my son, and it's really funny. Sometimes he has to wait for me to stop laughing so I can explain the joke to him. It really is very similar to HP. But I wouldn't be reading it if my son wasn't interested in it. I'm not spending any time discussing it with other adults. HP has something more to it. I think one of the very fun parts is that JKR is true to her characters. In "children's books" the adults are often cardboard or cartoonish in their inadeqacies. The WW may need Harry to rescue them, but the adults are quite powerful in themselves. There are a set of incredible posts about the Crouch family. Very interesting obsevations about these individuals, gleaned from the few lines of prose in the books. JKR packs a lot in. She makes even the very minor characters full. I think, in to their credit, the movie makers have followed her lead by choosing carefully for the adult cast. A friend of mine recently said that she didn't like the Trio in HBP. She came up with all sorts of reasons, she was sad it was true, but it was. Then in dawned on me that the Trio are teenagers. You know, sometimes I don't like my teenagers and the feeling is mutual, I'm sure. It makes perfectly good sense that, at times, the Trio would not be likable. (Which doesn't mean that I or my fellow reader doesn't LIKE the trio overall.) I discovered the books about the Mysteries of HP after I started finding little clues in the books. It was great reading things I'd picked up, and fun discovering--or being told--there were even more. But you can't talk to a book and something made me look for a community of others. So the fun of HP dosn't stop with the reading, but is expanded by the opportunity to discuss it and hash it over and make jokes with others about the different interpretations that are possible. I'm not in any hurry for the party to end. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 13:59:55 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:59:55 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152867 > Nrenka: > What we have here, people, is a failure to communicate. Not so much a failure to communicate as a failure to agree on a definition! Defining "nice" is probably as difficult as defining "good". > Nrenka: > And if you take a view of morality that is deeply > interested in the methods by which people carry out their actions > as well as what the actions are and what the intentions are, > being 'nice' suddenly assumes a lot more importance. Leslie41: Defining what "morality" is is also resoundingly difficult. There are philosophers who would agree with you, of course. They would expect Snape, despite the pressure he's under, to be "nice" at all times to be considered "good". But to me, a person who does the right thing because it's the right thing, selflessly and with no thought for personal gain or reward, and putting themselves in great danger in the process, is the very definition of goodness. > > Leslie41: > > Not a reason for him to be humble, really. Any attempt at such > > would only ring false. And though Snape may not be "humble," > > neither is he a show-off. > > On the other hand, he does tend to have a kind of invincible belief > in his own perceptions of a situation being the right one. Witness > his screaming fit both in the Shack and afterwards, which basically > amounts to a Tom Cruise-esque "I know what's going on here, > Hermione, you don't--don't be facile!" The irony is intentional, > I'm sure. Leslie41: But of course that "invincible belief" is correct in this case, is it not? Cite somewhere he has a hissy fit where he's NOT correct. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 14:22:55 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:22:55 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape WAS:Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers. In-Reply-To: <000601c67fd1$e7421d40$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152868 > Marion: > > Hermione soooo irritates me. I don't think she's particularly > bright either. Then you'd be in an extreme minority! > I'm a member of Mensa, and my experience (and those of my fellow > clubmembers) is that really intelligent children either do their > own quiet thing or 'play dumb' to fit in the crowd. Leslie41: As a college professor (though I must admit I've never been interested in joining mensa), I can say that I've seen my share of Hermiones who neither play dumb or keep to themselves. The smartest student I ever had in 20 years is just like Hermione. Knows everything, hand up all the time. "The brightest witch of her age," so to speak. The danger with a Hermione, which Snape I think realizes, is that such a student has the ability to suck the life from the rest of the class. He may hate the fact that she's a "know-it-all" (Snape as student actually fits your mensa experience more than Hermione), but his apparent "meanness" in refusing to call on her, and discouraging her from being so eager all the time, is to give the other students a chance to participate and learn as well. Anyone who's ever been in front of a classroom knows that the Hermiones of the world are a danger to the rest of the students. Not physically, of course, but mentally. The other students, knowing there is a Hermione in the class who will always have the answer, can grow either discouraged, or lazy, or both. Potentially, the class can degenerate into a conversation between the teacher and that one student, and great, great pains must be taken to avoid that happening. Effectively controlling that student, and redistributing the attention over the entirety of the class, is a constant and difficult task. Snape's cruellest act towards any of the students, I would assert, is his remark to Hermione about her beaverish teeth. He does this in front of the whole class, specifically to humiliate her. I certainly would never do such a thing, but one can see how letting the air out of a Hermione, undermining her overbearing confidence in the classroom, could be a good thing for the class as a whole, especially after years of her wanting to be the center of attention. I like Hermione a lot, but she would be a very frustrating student to teach. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Thu May 25 14:35:20 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:35:20 -0000 Subject: What is Manipulation (was Re: Nice versus good, was: Hagrid and Snape) In-Reply-To: <000b01c67f76$60b7bb00$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152869 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marion Ros" wrote: Marion: > Now, it could be that Lupin is trying to compensate for being a Dark > Creature. Maybe he feels he isn't allowed to be angry, or snarky, for fear > of being seen as 'that nasty werewolf' ("see?! See?! I *told* you he'd go > wild one day! They're all the same.." etc. etc.) But his 'niceness' is > blankets over his personality so completely, the real Remus J. Lupin has > become invisible. And I find that scary, to tell you the truth. > Lupin's niceness is too smooth. One day, it will crack. Renee: In the Shrieking Shack, Lupin isn't particularly nice when he's about to kill Wormtail together with Sirius, unless you define `nice' as merely referring to manners, which I don't. And in OotP, to mention another example, he's not particularly nice about Umbridge (not that I blame him for that), though it *is* telling we have to hear this from Sirius, his friend. Lupin doesn't let himself go in the presence of just anyone; like you point out, people might attribute it to the fact that he's a werewolf, something he's very anxious to avoid. But it's obvious enough from the books that there is a more unpleasant side to Lupin; he's by no means a goody-2-shoes. *If* his niceness is a blanket over his personality, it doesn't cover it completely. But like Magpie in a previous post, I find the automatical assumption that niceness is always a cover for something more unpleasant a bit strange, and insulting to certain personality types. So people who generally behave nicely are play-acting? (Interestingly, this is how the Dutch tend to see the English, if they give in to prejudice.) If you ask me, this is a misconception. Being nice most of the time is part of Lupin's personality, just as being pedantic is part of Hermione's, or being hot-headed part of Ron's. He may cultivate it more than most, due to what he is, but that doesn't mean it's merely a mask. For Lupin to be scary, he doesn't need to be a raging turmoil underneath a mask of niceness. Lupin's dark side is the werewolf, and after PoA this is no longer invisible. One little slip - and we've seen he can and does slip - and the raging monster is unleashed again. As I see it, this is a metaphor, and from a literary point of view it would be inelegant to have Lupin crack in human form - unless by cracking you mean that he'll get tired of taking precautions and will let the wolf run free in Book 7, because that does seem possible to me. What I do think, though, is that Lupin's nicenes *is* a mask where Snape is concerned. It just doesn't sound believable when he says he neither likes nor dislikes Snape; I believe he does dislike him but carefully refrains from adding fuel to Harry's hatred of the man, because that would be counterproductive. Marion: > Besides, I find Lupin manipulative in a far more subtler way. Look, It's > late and tomorrow morning I'm going on a trip to Oxford for a week and I > just can't be bothered to look it all up, but when Harry rants to Lupin > about Snape, Lupin will always correct Harry with a 'Professor Snape'. That > *seems* nice and polite, but suppose Harry would say something like "That > rotten Snape exposed you as a werewolf and got you fired" (I'm making this > up, remember, because I'm not in a positition to look up true quotes from > the books but there are a few of these kind of conversations around) Would > Lupin not be nicer and more honest when he would reply with "No Harry, I > endangered the school and therefore I resigned myself" or even "I don't > think Professor Snape could get me to resign if I didn't think it were for > the best myself"? But in these kind of cases, Lupin (and Dumbledore) always > respond with a "that's *Professor* Snape, Harry". > It *sounds* like he's defending Snape, but he's really not. Reinforcing the > correct title of Snape is superficial. > Renee: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression he only does so in PoA, where Snape is his colleague. He probably sees it as his professorial duty to correct Harry, which IMO it would be. In OotP and HBP, where Lupin is no longer Snape's colleague, he doesn't bat an eyebrow when Harry leaves out the "Professor"; on the contrary, on occasion he says "Snape", too, though he talks about "Severus" as well. Correcting Harry was a formality. Renee From megs0124 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 14:46:05 2006 From: megs0124 at yahoo.com (Megan) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:46:05 -0000 Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152870 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com , "Victoria Scott" wrote: > > > "Tonks" > > >Well to get us off of our usual topic of "you know who", lets talk > >about LV. When DD visited him in the orphanage Tom had taken these > >things and was hording them. Does anyone have any ideas what these > >objects might mean? > > "G.C" > I have an idea about these items, I had originally just shunned them as meer > objects. BUT what we know is that there are still 3 missing Horcrux's. What > do you think about these objects being those remaining horcrux's. No-one > would suspect them and they could be quite valuable to Voldemort if they are > the first things he stole using his powers and he may want to salvage them. > It could also make sense that Harry would know what each of these muggle > items are seeing as though they wouldn't really be used by wizards (?) > > Well just a thought. I'm not sure where he would have hid them, but you > never know, they may be in the room of requirement with all the other items > stashed away right under Harry's nose? > > What do you all think? > G.C. > Didn't Dumbledore (and I am quoting from memory here), that these objects were unimportant to the present time and that he had already looked into these things? In a way, I think we are trying too hard to read into what these simple objects mean. They are simple childrens toys, nothing else. To Tom's victims at the time they were something different. In an orphanage, and to other children, simple objects are meaningful. Material possessions, expecially in a place such as an orphanage, are rare and prized to the individuals who own them. These objects were important in some way to the children from whom Tom took them. Maybe it was the only thing the child owned that was not stipened out by the Orphanage, or maybe the objects were the only peice they had left from the family. Whatever they were, they were meaningful AT THE TIME only. He was also told to return the objects to the people whom they belonged to. I do believe, however, that these were the precursers to the Horicruxes. Tom/Voldy realized then that taking personal objects from people gave you a certain power over them. Then, when Tom became Voldermort, he realized by associating a bit of his soul to a meaningful object through a murder, gave it any more power. I just had a realization. Has anyone realized that, in the memories, the horocruxes he made and the people he killed to form said Horicrux, were all the OWNERS of the objects. What if, and this is off the wall, that the INVISIBILITY cloak was an object of GRIFFENDOR??? I know this is a CRAZY idea but it is a semi-reasonable one. We all have been searching our brains to figure out what object could be Griffendor's. It I am right on my crazy theory that the Horicrux killings were done performed with the deaths of people who had the prized object in their possession AT THE TIME OF THE DEATH, when what is to say that James was not in possession of the cloak at his time of death. We know Dumbledore states in SS that James left the cloak in his possession. Maybe DD received it before James' death but VM didn't know it? Now I am on the verge of incoherient rambling so I'll end this. Am I just nutty or does anyone follow mt logic? Megan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu May 25 14:53:16 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:53:16 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152871 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > ...and when things had been sorted out after the battle... > > "But Morgoth himself the Valar thrust through the Door of Night > beyond the Walls of the World, into the Timeless Void; and a guard is set for ever on those walls and E?rendil keeps watch upon the r > amparts of the sky." > (ibid.) > > To me, this would seem to be something worse than death, > > On the subject of the prophecy - yet again! > > I do not think that one of the two dying is absolutely > necessary because the prophecy - like the Delphic utterances - is vague. > Tonks: OK once more for old times sake, let look at the thing again. I was playing around in the Dictionary last night. We "think" we know what words mean, but do we? She worded this very carefully. So this tells us there is some deception in there somewhere.. "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 hand 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..." According to Dictionary.com we have the following definitions: Vanquish: *To defeat or conquer in battle; subjugate *To overcome or subdue *Suppress *Come out better in a competition, race, or conflict Live: To be alive; exist Survive: *To remain alive or in existence *To carry on despite hardships or trauma *To remain functional or usable Die: *To cease living; become dead; expire *To cease existing, especially by degrees; fade *To experience an agony or suffering suggestive of that of death *To become indifferent *To lose strength; subside *Pass from physical life and lose all bodily attributes and functions necessary to sustain life; *Languish as with love or desire *Any of various tools or devices for imparting a desired shape, form, or finish to a material or for impressing an object or material I have suggested that the struggle between LV and Harry is symbolic of the struggle between Death and Love. But what else can folks come up with? I too do not think that Harry will kill, in war or out. It is possible that Harry will try to possess LV and LV will not be able to stand LOVE in his body and will pull his own soul out or kill himself (if he is modeled on Hitler, this would also fit). And Sirius will have some part in this, as well as DD somehow. Tonks_op From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu May 25 15:03:30 2006 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:03:30 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152872 ***Alias series finale spoilers below!*** Randy: > Sydney Bristow has been called the Chosen One in the past. In this > episode her dying father, (Jack Bristow) tells her that only she > can face and defeat her mother. The dying father, JAck then > confronts the evil Arvin Sloane who has finally attained eternal > life. He realizes that Sloane can never be killed now, so the > dying Jack does the next best thing. He blows up the cavern that > they are both standing inside and traps Sloane in the rubble for > eternity. Sloane cannot die, but cannot move to escape. > > I immediately thought of Dumbledore's statement that "there are > worse things than death". I must confess that trapping Voldemort > for all eternity in an undead state with no horcruxes and no > helpers to find him would prevent Harry from having to actually > kill Voldemort. I think this may be a possible ending for Book > Seven. A dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, > but an eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry will > not have become a trained assassin as his legacy from Hogwarts. SSSusan: Whoa. Randy, I watched that series finale, too, but the comparison to HP never once crossed my mind. (Go ahead, call me dense!) But now that you've presented it, it's fun to consider. I confess that while I was pleased with Jack's quick thinking as his own life was fading away, and thoroughly enjoyed the look on his face just before he pressed the detonater (Yay, SpyDad!), there was also a part of me that was ... I don't know... BOTHERED by a Sloane trapped in perpetuity, just as I would be somehow BOTHERED by a Voldy trapped in perpetuity. Such a scenario would, yes, prevent Harry from becoming a "murderer," a thought which distresses many an HP fan. I am not one of those, however, feeling myself that such a killing could be viewed more as "necessity" or as "self-defense" and thus would not class Harry as a "murderer" in my mind. (Heh. Rather like how I won't see Snape as a murderer if my position that he killed DD upon DD's request/command is borne out. ) But, yes, I can see that there are many fans who would like for Harry to have this kind of out. I'm not even very well able to articulate what it is that bothers me about such a scenario. Maybe it's that I don't want to have to consider his ongoing state; I want him to be GONE and totally out of my thoughts. Maybe it's the worry that, though trapped *theoretically* for all eternity, there would also always be the slightest chance that another Wormtail will come along, seek out and find his old Evil Master, help him escape whatever's trapping him, present him with a wand, and voila -- VoldyWar III is on the horizon. So although I see the parallel you're drawing here with DD's "There are things worse than death," and it's a nifty parallel, I personally wouldn't find this as satisfying as finding, at the end, that Voldy is truly GONE. Even if he's gone, there would always be the worry that some *other* evil overlord will pop up, but at least there wouldn't be any worry that this *particular* one will come back. However, just to play along with your scenario a little bit more, I've noticed a couple of posters have mentioned the "Neither can live while the other survives" segment of the prophecy as a reason for how this really can't happen. I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't think it would be out of the realm of possibility for JKR to be utilizing one of the lower-in-the-list definitions of "live." Here, for instance, from dictionary.com: "live v. 6. To pursue a positive, satisfying existence; enjoy life: those who truly live." So, she could be meaning that version of living. It could simply mean that Harry will die (as Jack did) in causing whatever befalls- but-doesn't-kill Voldy. You know? Voldy survives, so neither can live: Harry literally and Voldy in the "pursuing a positive, satisfying existence" sense. I hope not, but I think your suggestion is still a possibility. Siriusly Snapey Susan, wondering if JJ Abrams is a closet Harry Potter fan From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu May 25 15:25:39 2006 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:25:39 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... In-Reply-To: <43a.2196f62.31a64678@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152873 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ClareWashbrook at ... wrote: > > And another one is that JKR is not a teacher and the characters are meant to > signify other aspects of the plotline (such as problematic partisanship), not > necessarily embody a educational philosophy. Finwitch: Actually, she IS a teacher. She's been teaching French abroad for instance, and reached an education in Scotland - not that she's teaching now, rather doing a campaign against the cagebeds for the sake of poor orphans and writing the 7th book - but she certainly has been. As for me -- well, let me just say that there's a difference between a teacher and a lecturer. Snape IMO fits to latter category, rather than the former. Finwitch From empress.najwa at gmail.com Thu May 25 04:40:35 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 04:40:35 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152874 > Randy wrote: > > I immediately thought of Dumbledore's statement that "there are > > worse things than death". I must confess that trapping Voldemort > > for all eternity in an undead state with no horcruxes and no > > helpers to find him would prevent Harry from having to actually > > kill Voldemort. I think this may be a possible ending for Book > > Seven. A dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, > > but an eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry > > will not have become a trained assassin as his legacy from > > Hogwarts. > Steven1965aaa: > However, with regard to theory re: ending --- Neither can live > while the other survives. Najwa: I do like that theory, but Steven has a point about what was said in the prophecy. I do remember Dumbledore being very upset with Harry for continuing to be obsessed with the prophecy, since it was Voldemort who chose for it to be so. I wonder, what is the difference between living and surviving? According to wordweb, to survive is to "Continue to live; endure or last" and to live is to "Have life, be alive" or "Pursue a positive and satisfying existence" among other things. As hard as I try, I can't find a way around it, so I wonder. Plus, can we really count Voldie as being alive? His soul is all ripped up and stored into different containers and he has some generic body he's marching around in. And since I do think that Harry is a Horcrux, I tend to wonder if we can count him as alive as well, though they both tend to be surviving. The only way I can make sense of it is if Voldie continues to survive, then Harry can't have a life, and/or can't have his own soul by itself, since its sharing part of LV's. And Voldie can't really go about his business with his biggest fear running around and training to destroy him. Maybe that gleam of triumph in Dumbledore's eyes was because part of Harry's soul is now running through LV's veins. Najwa, who always thinks she's onto something and then realizes that she's just confusing herself more. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Thu May 25 05:17:56 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 05:17:56 -0000 Subject: Sexy Snape ? JKR's men In-Reply-To: <20060524230008.52116.qmail@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152875 > Kerstin: > I was so amazed at how many of you actually like Snape or find > him attractive. First I never really did pay that much > attention to him and then I think I just kind of accepted Harry's > view on him. So I can't really see anything favourable about him. > > BK: > Well, I did take note of Snape from the very beginning. I do > enjoy his character and his interactions with the others...most > notably our trio. But liking his snarky wit and intelligence is > quite a different thing than finding him sexy. No, sexy and Snape > *together* just don't work for me. > > Kerstin: > Now Sirius, of course, is totally an other matter. > > BK: > On this point, I agree. I knew that Sirius was drop dead sexy > even before JKR confirmed it somewhere. Najwa: I do find Snape attractive, but I suppose that is due to the gothic look that Alan Rickman pulled off quite nicely, and I do adore Alan Rickman, so perhaps I'm attracted to the movie Snape, and not the drawings in the book. However I do find his snideness attractive at times but I hate the way he deals with Harry and Neville. As for Sirius, I really wasn't fond of him in that way. I loved him for what he gave Harry, hope and a father figure, but he was just too much of a bad boy for me and near the end of his life he was reckless, and I am quite done with that type. Lupin was great because he was intelligent, and the way I imagined him was a sad man who was probably quite handsome had he smiled more and had less stress to deal with. He has a nice personality as well and if he just didn't slip up and forget his potion that night, I'd have called him completely dependable. Arthur Weasley is a great dad, and a great husband, and that's great, but I don't find him sexy. Lockhart is completely annoying, onceited, and untrustworthy, and I don't care if he was Adonis or close to him. I really don't think up until now I can say that anyone of JKR's men would suit my tastes, but to be quite honest I'd probably say the person who came closest to it would be Dumbledore. He has an odd sense of humor, he was very intelligent, and even though I'm not into beards or long hair I would have probably not cared because of all of the other characteristics that he has. The age gap is huge though, so that would be an issue. As for JKR's boys, well since they are boys in the book I technically feel bad, but since they were all pretty much born in 1980, which is the year of my birth, I can consider them my age. Ron is definitely not my type, great guy and all, and I'd probably love to be his friend, but he's too thickheaded and lacks effort and intellect in my humble opinion. He can be a real pig. I know JKR loves the idea of opposites attracting, and is probably inspired by Pride and Prejudice, or so I have read by many Ron-Hermione shippers in the past, however I don't think she did it right for me to accept it. I was always a Harry-Hermione shipper, because they just seem right for each other in my opinion. Harry's great, but his putting Ginny off so he can do his job was a big let down. Sure he feels he needs to protect her, but I don't think it matters much anymore because they were already known as a couple and I'm sure the junior DEs found out, plus she is a Weasley and related to his best mate, and the daughter of two OOtP members. As a whole, the girl is in danger, so just let her tag along and be in love while you still can; her brother and Hermione will be there for God's sake. That is my argument to Harry. Anyway I have rambled on enough about this subject. Najwa, who thinks JKR is an excellent writer but lacks in the romantic chemistry portion of her writing. From triinum at yahoo.com Thu May 25 15:46:21 2006 From: triinum at yahoo.com (triinum) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:46:21 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152877 Randy: > I immediately thought of Dumbledore's statement that "there are > worse things than death". I must confess that trapping Voldemort > for all eternity in an undead state with no horcruxes and no helpers > to find him would prevent Harry from having to actually kill > Voldemort. I think this may be a possible ending for Book Seven. A > dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, but an > eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry will not have > become a trained assassin as his legacy from Hogwarts. > > What do you think? > > Trin: Yes, but wouldn't that be rather too cruel? I mean, Voldy is a poor sick person, a psychopath. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to kill him as painlessly as possible, rather than sentence him to an eternal torture? He didn't *choose* to have a brain damage, did he? Can killing a dangerous mad beast be considered a murder? Of course, in real life, planned killing of a psychopath would be murder, but in real life they can be locked up safely in hospitals. And for that matter, would you consider Harry a nicer person if he killed the madman, or if he sent him to a much worse fate of a torture with which there's no escape, never ever? Myself, I would understand Harry if he, out of rage and vengence, chose the second one, but that would not make him anything *better* than a murderer. Rather *worse*. This is the problem I have always had with the concern, expressed by many, that Harry is going to be a murderer (murder being the ultimate crime), and that he should avoid this at any cost. Claiming that would be quite the same as claiming that Snape would be less guilty if he killed DD by some other means than AK, e.g. strangling him, even though AK is the most painless killing device there is! :) If the cost of avoiding AK use is sending your victim to a fate that's *worse* than AK, would it really be worth it then?? From pegdigrazia at yahoo.com Thu May 25 16:42:10 2006 From: pegdigrazia at yahoo.com (Peg DiGrazia) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 09:42:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] What is Manipulation (was Re: Nice versus good, was: Hagrid and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060525164210.47838.qmail@web42208.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152878 Renee: >Being nice most of the time is part of Lupin's personality, just as being pedantic is >part of Hermione's, or being hot-headed part of Ron's. He may cultivate it more than >most, due to what he is, but that doesn't mean it's merely a mask. Peg: I agree. I don't at all see Lupin's being nice as a mask. To me, he's a man who's struggled most of his life to keep his emotions under control because he hates the fact that he loses control completely once a month. And honestly, some people are simply born with personalities that are not outgoing or aggressive, and it's difficult for them to speak their minds, but that doesn't mean they're being fake. People who are extroverted tend to have a hard time understanding that. Lupin's clearly unhappy and brooding at Christmas time in HBP, but is as nice as ever to Harry. Does this make him phony? It's not Harry's fault that Lupin had to go and live with the werewolves and can't be with his girlfriend; the fact that Lupin speaks kindly to him and doesn't snap at him to me is further evidence that he's a decent man with concern for others' feelings. Renee: >What I do think, though, is that Lupin's nicenes *is* a mask where Snape >is concerned. It just doesn't sound believable when he says he neither likes nor >dislikes Snape; I believe he does dislike him but carefully refrains from adding fuel to >Harry's hatred of the man, because that would be counterproductive. Peg: Here I disagree. I don't think Snape is one of Lupin's favorite people, but I can certainly understand Lupin not disliking him. He saw firsthand how Snape was tormented at Hogwarts (and yes, stepping in to stop the Levicorpus incident would have been the right thing to do, but -- and not saying that it's good that he didn't -- I absolutely understand why he didn't,) and also firmly believes that Snape left the DEs at great personal risk to work for the Order. It is possible to dislike someone's personality while still feeling compassion for his circumstances and admiring his courage. That adds up to neither liking nor disliking the person, in my book. I do find Lupin's immediate willingness to kill Pettigrew in the Shrieking Shack a bit unnerving, but I think those circumstances were so extreme and shocking to everyone involved that it's, again, while not right, understandable. And I would imagine that, in that shocked mental state, killing Peter would have felt more like killing the during wartime than like murder. I adore Lupin. I know his faults are many; he is certainly weak and passive-aggressive, but I don't see how that makes him any less of a kind and good man. I believe he's doing the best he can with the circumstances and personality he's been given. I guess he's the adult character I relate to the most... If he does turn out to be ESE I'll eat my words, but I find him infinitely more sexy than Snape!!! :-p --------------------------------- Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone calls as low as 1?/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From iam.kemper at gmail.com Thu May 25 16:43:53 2006 From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (Kemper) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 09:43:53 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A fate worse than death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <700201d40605250943i7d6b24d9la31bd27b2a27a206@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152879 On 5/25/06, Tonks wrote: > > Tonks: > OK once more for old times sake, let look at the thing again. ... We > "think" we know what > words mean, but do we? She worded this very carefully. So this tells > us there is some deception in there somewhere.. > > "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 > > hand 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..." > > ...Snip definitions of some prophecy words from www.dictionary.com. ... > I have suggested that the struggle between LV and Harry is symbolic > of the struggle between Death and Love. But what else can folks come > up with? I too do not think that Harry will kill, in war or out. It > is possible that Harry will try to possess LV and LV will not be > able to stand LOVE in his body and will pull his own soul out or > kill himself (if he is modeled on Hitler, this would also fit). And > Sirius will have some part in this, as well as DD somehow. > .. . Kemper now: I can't agree less. Death is needed in Life. It is not evil. It's the 'next great adventure' according to DD. What LV represents in this seven book long struggle is Fear. He lives in fear. It's not that LV wants to live forever because there's so much to see and do in Life; it's that LV never wants to die because he's afraid of Death. Where LV represents Fear, Harry represents Courage. LV represents Apathy; Harry represents Love. LV represents Selfishness; Harry represents Compassion. Murdering people (LV) doesn't make one a symbol of Death. Just like living for centuries (NFlamel) doesn't make one a symbol of Life. -kemper [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Thu May 25 17:06:26 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:06:26 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152880 Finwitch: > Actually, she IS a teacher. She's been teaching French > abroad for instance, and reached an education in Scotland - > not that she's teaching now, rather doing a campaign > against the cagebeds for the sake of poor orphans and > writing the 7th book - but she certainly has been. houyhnhnm: Please correct me if I am misinformed, but I understood that Rowling taught English in a night school in Portugal for a year or so. Many people who want to travel and work in another country do this. It does not require any kind of professional training or certification, AFAIK, just being bi-lingual. I know it is part of the media hype that Rowling was a former teacher, but I think it's just that--hype. I don't regard her as a professional educator. She is certainly not a career teacher. Her knowledge of the culture of a school appears to be mostly from a student's point of view. From coverton at netscape.com Thu May 25 08:58:49 2006 From: coverton at netscape.com (corey_over) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 08:58:49 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152881 > > Betsy Hp: > > Snape will dress Neville down in *front* of his peers, but he > > doesn't actually invite those peers to turn on Neville to sell > > the point home. It seems that McGonagall routinely turns her > > house against those she's disciplining. She does so to Neville, > > Harry and Hermione, that we've seen. > > Alla: > And of course the important thing to me when we compare > Snape and McGonagall's treatment of Neville is that while > McGonagall is CERTAINLY guilty of mistreating Neville on two > occasions IMO (that I remember), she also praises him (there is > nothing wrong with your work but the lack of confidence). THAT > Snape never does and that is why I think that his treatment of > Neville is much worse. Corey: I disagree with you Betsy, I don't think for an instant that McGonagall mistreats Harry nearly as much as Snape. After all, let's not forget that Snape never complimented poor Neville. And McGonagall, while very strict with Neville and everyone in her house, has at least complimented Neville. That's more than Snape can ever say. I think we're forgetting the quote that says in HBP when the students are geting their Newt schedules that McGonagall says to Neville that his grandmother should be proud of the grandson that she has and not who she doesn't have. Or something like that. Don't have the book in front of me. But that's my main point, that McGonagall, while strict and firm has at least complimented Neville and that's more than Snape can say. Your fellow member, Corey From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 17:47:34 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:47:34 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152882 > houyhnhnm: > > Please correct me if I am misinformed, but I understood that > Rowling taught English in a night school in Portugal for a year or > so. Many people who want to travel and work in another country do > this. It does not require any kind of professional training or > certification, AFAIK, just being bi-lingual. I know it is part of > the media hype that Rowling was a former teacher, but I think it's > just that--hype. I don't regard her as a professional educator. > She is certainly not a career teacher. Her knowledge of the culture > of a school appears to be mostly from a student's point of view. > Leslie41 After that experience she came back to England and trained properly, and then went to work at Leith Academy (Scotland?). She was apparently what they call a "supply teacher." So no, obviously she's not a "career teacher" but yes, she was formally trained and yes, she had a (semi) regular job in a Scottish Acadmey about ten years ago. Google Rowling and "Leith Academy". From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu May 25 17:50:57 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:50:57 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152883 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Leslie41: > But of course that "invincible belief" is correct in this case, is > it not? Cite somewhere he has a hissy fit where he's NOT correct. Excuse me? Hermione raises the objection that hey, maybe Sirius Black isn't actually the murderer responsible for the Potters' deaths and all of that, and that it might be worth listening to his story. Snape screams at her and refuses to listen. When she brings up this potential again in the Hospital Wing, he tells her to 'shut up, you silly girl'. One of the things that makes the entire scene work, both in the Shack and in the Hospital Wing, is that we (and Hermione) *actually* know more than Snape does, and he's thus responsible for making himself look like an ass (see comments to Fudge and subsequent fit of spitting rage). So unless I am really, really missing something... -Nora loves the late evening sun From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Thu May 25 17:31:22 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:31:22 -0000 Subject: Predictions about book 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152884 I'm going to make some predictions about book 7, I do this for the joy it will give others when it turns out that every one of them is wrong. Well, for whatever it's worth: 1)Book 7 will be published on July 13 2007, the same day as the next movie. 2)JKR will abandon the "and the" convention for the title of book 7 to signify that it's different from the other 6; so the last Harry Potter book ever written will be called "Harry Potter The Chosen One". 3)In these dangerous times Ron and Hermione will decide it's now or never, so the wedding that we all know will lead off the book will become a double wedding; it might even become a triple but probably not. 4)RAB is Regulus Aldebaran Black. (Aldebaran means "the follower") 5)Snape loved Lilly Potter and that's the reason he hates Harry not because he looks like James, Snape blames Harry for Lilly's death. 6)Dumbledore trusted Snape because he detected sincere grief from him when he heard the Potters were murdered, and because 16 years ago Snape made an unbreakable vow to protect the life of their only child. 7)There is room in the book for only one bad guy to get redeemed and that spot will fall to Draco. 8)Percy will betray Harry to the Death Eaters and will meet justice for this foul deed by a member of his own family. 9)Harry's Patronus will change from a stag to a phoenix, probably near the end of the book. 10)Voldemort will definitely not win of course, but people will be debating for a long time if Harry was really victorious and if the price he paid was too high. 11)The last chapter before the epilogue will be called "The Next Great Adventure" or "The Man Who Died". 12)Neville will survive and become the Herbology Professor at Hogwarts and eventually Headmaster. 13)Ron and Hermione will also survive, and they will name their first child "Harry". Eggplant From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 18:19:08 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:19:08 -0000 Subject: Predictions about book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152885 Eggplant: I'm going to make some predictions about book 7, I do this for the joy it will give others when it turns out that every one of them is wrong. Well, for whatever it's worth: Alla: Heeee. I want to play too for the chance of being wrong. Snipping some of yours for complete agreement or disagreement. Eggplant: 1)Book 7 will be published on July 13 2007, the same day as the next movie. Alla: I'd say 07/07/07. Eggplant: 5)Snape loved Lilly Potter and that's the reason he hates Harry not because he looks like James, Snape blames Harry for Lilly's death. Alla: Oh, yes, unfortunately me too on this one, BIG me too. Eggplant: 7)There is room in the book for only one bad guy to get redeemed and that spot will fall to Draco. Alla: I would say that there is room for more than one bad guy to be redeemed, but I would say that it will be BAD or gray guy redeemed, not misunderstood hero (am talking about Snape of course). How would I translate this into prediction? Snape killed DD because he truly felt he had no other choice, but then came to regret it, realizing that he should have at least tried to fight for DD. Redemption? Not sure, maybe as in dying for Harry. Eggplant: 8)Percy will betray Harry to the Death Eaters and will meet justice for this foul deed by a member of his own family. Alla: I think that with the book 6 and Percy's behavior in the Burrow the possibility of his redemption, unless he is a spy went significantly low, but I am still hoping that he is a prat, not a traitor. Eggplant: 11The last chapter before the epilogue will be called The Next Great Adventure or The Man Who Died. Alla: Possibly, but I am hoping it will be called The man who lived again. Harry will "die" somehow, but will experience symbolic resurrection Eggplant: 12)Neville will survive and become the Herbology Professor at Hogwarts and eventually Headmaster. Alla: Yes. Eggplant: 13)Ron and Hermione will also survive, and they will name their first child "Harry". Alla: How about Harry and Ginny naming their first child (or twins) James and Lily? Sappy, I know. Alla: Some of additional predictions. We will learn more about the night of the Prank and why is it so important to the plot. Lupin is not Voldemort's servant, had never been Voldemort's servant and will not be Voldemort's servant. Hopefully Tonks and him will survive and marry too. Draco will do something useful for the order OR will be dead in the beginning of book 7. Dumbledore is dead, really and most sincerely dead. From lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk Thu May 25 17:42:44 2006 From: lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk (Tara Tierney) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:42:44 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152886 Lupinlore wrote: > I think this is absolutely and totally irrelevent. Nothing that > was done to Snape, by omission or commission, in any way excuses > his abuse of Harry and Neville or IN ANY WAY releases him from > punishment for that reprehensible abuse. Nor does it in any way > lessen Dumbledore's fault in allowing the abuse to take place and > continue. Lunasa: I myself have never really looked at Snape's actions in the classroom as child abuse. He's not a nice person, that's fairly obvious. But I've always wondered what Harry would have turned out like if Snape hadn't been there to take him down a peg or three early in the game, before Harry even managed to build himself up a big ego. I mean Harry was little, he was eleven, he's one of the youngest kids in the school, every first year is aware of that when they enter a new school. But most first years remain unknown until their second or third year. Everyone knew Harry. He'd been bullied all his life by Dudley, and now he's dumped in this boarding school where not a whole lot of people are willing to come out and take a pop at him in the light that Dudley or his aunt and uncle ever did. He's not seen as a weirdo or a freak, in fact most people hold in the light of some kind of hero. What Snape said was right, Harry was a celebrity. But he was also eleven, and that kind of thing would have gone to his head, fairly quickly. Now Snape didn't need to carry on with it. That first year, hell that first week, would have been enough, but why mess with a good thing. Neville has come out of his shell, and Harry is barely willing to accept that kind of crap off Snape anymore, never mind anyone else. Harry has a good many faults in my opinion, but I've not once seen him abuse the wizarding world's pride in 'Harry Potter' to make fun of others, or even to make his life easier. It would have been right and easy to do that... If wouldn't have been mortally embarrassed by that. And who was it that made him embarrassed of his fame? I think that, whether he intended to or not, Snape has made the two of them stronger people. If Snape wasn't there to shame Neville out of his shell or just plain shame Harry, how do you think they'd have turned out? Lunasa From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 18:43:07 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:43:07 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152888 Alla wrote: Mcgonagall does not tell Neville that he needs to change anything in him, she does not tell him that he is clumsy idiot, or moronic, but that his work IS good, except he lacks confidence. > > I don't know how explain it better, but after this praise my confidence would go up. Carol responds: Would it really? Evidently we have a different idea of what constitutes praise. Encouragement, possibly, but I don't see how publicly calling attention to his fear of failure can be considered praise. For me the words "Yes, you, too, Longbottom" imply that Neville is at the bottom of the class, or at least the bottom of the Gryffindors, and knows it. (*Even* Neville can pass the OWL if he makes the effort, she seems to be saying, which is essentially what Snape is saying as well.) And "Nothing wrong with your work *except* a lack of confidence" implies that something *is* wrong with his work. His "sad little disbelieving noise" (OoP Am. ed. 257) suggests that he expects to fail, not the result that someone whose work in the class has been good would anticipate. (He doesn't expect to fail the Herbology OWL, IIRC.) Certainly he lacks confidence, as McGonagall says, but it's unclear whether that lack of confidence is the cause or the effect of his apparently dismal performance in the class. I would guess that one reinforces the other. To move from inference to canon, I don't think that the admittedly limited canon supports your claim that Neville's work in Transfiguration is good. In GoF, McGonagall humiliates him in front of the other Gryffindors by reminding him of an already embarrassing mistake: "'Longbottom, kindly do *not* reveal that you can't even perform a simple Switching Spell in front of anyone from Durmstrang!' Professor McGonagall barked at the end of one particularly difficult lesson, during which Neville had accidentally transplanted his own ears onto a cactus" (GoF Am. ed. 256-57, emphasis in original). Not exactly an indication of good work in her class, and I would argue that "can't *even* perform a *simple* switching spell" does imply that she considers him clumsy and inept. At any rate, I can't see those words, spoken in front of his fellow Gryffindors, as doing anything to boost his self-confidence. They seem to me to reflect the same kind of frustration that Snape expresses when Neville melts yet another cauldron. Ineptitude in either subject can have dangerous consequences, and while humiliating Neville is certainly not the way to improve his performance, his repeated mistakes in both classes would try the patience of a saint. I do think that McGonagall was trying to be kind when she talked about his lack of confidence, but I don't think that her remark on that occasion or her treatment of Neville in general is likely to boost his self-esteem. Nor do I think that he does any better in her classes than in Snape's based on the available canon. He scrapes an Acceptable on his Transfiguration OWL (and evidently on his Potions OWL as well) in the absence of his teacher(s), but his forgetfulness, clumsiness, and inattentiveness, along with his lack of self-confidence, appear to be exacerbated by stern teachers who make their scorn for incompetence clear, whether that teacher is Snape or McGonagall. IOW, McGonagall may not be Neville's Boggart in PoA, but she'd probably be third in line behind Snape and Gran. (Post-OoP, I rather think he has a more realistic Boggart, Bellatrix Lestrange, who's a great deal scarier than Potions master!Snape, but that's irrelevant here.) BTW, since Transfiguration, unlike Potions, CoMC, and Herbology, appears to be a one-House class, we never see how McGonagall teaches students from other Houses. (All of her interactions with Draco, for example, are outside the classroom.) We have no idea how she deals with incompetence on the part of, say, Crabbe and Goyle or whether she awards points to Slytherins or Ravenclaws or Hufflepuffs who perform well in her classes. All we know is that she gives Draco detention after he fails to turn in his homework twice in a row (certainly a reasonable punishment but not indicative of her classroom interactions with him or other Slytherins). Certainly she favors her own House (as does Snape), but we don't see how or whether this favoritism manifests itself in the classroom because we only see her interacting with students from her own House. IMO, the only teacher at Hogwarts who is both highly competent and impartial without being in the least fluffy (or concerned about students' "feelings" when they ask questions that she believes to be none of their business) is Professor Grubbly-Plank, and she's only a substitute. A sad state of affairs, perhaps, but hardly unexpected considering the total absence of teacher training in the WW. Carol, wondering how McGonagall would have reacted if it had been Draco who had caught the Remembrall in front of her window in SS/PS, or if Harry had been in a different House ("Professor Flitwick, I've found you a new Seeker!") From tifflblack at earthlink.net Thu May 25 18:49:09 2006 From: tifflblack at earthlink.net (tiffany black) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 11:49:09 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Peeves In-Reply-To: <8C84E141BB3F413-1964-9D8@FWM-D44.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <039e01c6802b$e9236d80$6402a8c0@self6e4d6e0c5b> No: HPFGUIDX 152889 Najwa said >People who die unhappy become ghosts right? Or is it people that are >afraid to die become ghosts? If so, then why are there poltergeists >like Peeves? Did he die in an angry manner? Nikkalmati: I've seen other listees refer to Peeves as a ghost, but I am not sure if there is any canon for that. I always thought a poltergeist is a different kind or creature entirely, not someone who was once alive. Is there some evidence in the books to the contrary? Tiffany: says: I don't believe there is anything in the books, but here's what I found on j.K. Rowling's site in the FAQ section. The link is http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=67 Peeves chews gum, how can he when he is a ghost? (Nearly Headless Nick can't eat). Peeves isn't a ghost; he was never a living person. He is an indestructible spirit of chaos, and solid enough to unscrew chandeliers, throw walking sticks and, yes, chew gum. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> You can search right from your browser? It's easy and it's free. See how. http://us.click.yahoo.com/_7bhrC/NGxNAA/yQLSAA/s4wxlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Wondering what to do this summer? Go to Patronus 2006 (http://www.patronus.dk/2006) or, if you're already registered for Lumos (http://www.hp2006.org), meet up with other HPfGU members there! 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 Yahoo! Groups Links From oppen at mycns.net Thu May 25 19:41:08 2006 From: oppen at mycns.net (ericoppen) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:41:08 -0000 Subject: Neville's problems Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152890 While I will agree that Neville L. is a forgetful sort, I do think that he's been trampled on by that grandmother of his (and, to an extent, by Professor McGonagall, who probably strongly reminds him of Granny Dearest) to the point where he doesn't have any self- confidence left. When you think you're probably going to fail, or at least not come up to the standard set for you by the authority figures in your life, failure is much likelier than it would be otherwise. In a lot of ways, I believe that Neville would have been better-off as a Hufflepuff or a Ravenclaw. He seems to get along splendidly with Professor Sprout, and Professor Flitwick doesn't come across as...shall we say, _forbidding?_...a character as Professor McGonagall. While I'm sure that Professor McGonagall means nothing but the best, she probably can't help being exasperated with him. If she's as gifted for Transfiguration as Snape seems to be with Potions, she almost certainly can't relate to a student who's just having a real, real hard time with the subject. And I do think that it would be hilariously funny if _Neville_ became the next Dark-Lord-to-be..."At last! I have the POWER! I shall CONQUER THE WORLD with my army of mutant talking rhododendrons! And all will fear me, and they will call me 'Neville the Devil!' BWAHAHAHAHAHA!" Meanwhile, Harry, Ron and Hermione are looking at each other, and saying, in chorus: "Here we go again!" From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 19:59:05 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:59:05 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152891 Leslie41: > Yes, but I don't think it's accurate either. "Niceness" doesn't > spring at all from any sort of humility. I think "niceness" (and > manners, etc.) spring from a desire to do what is socially correct, > and be socially accepted as a result. Lanval: Or from a simple, basic feeling of goodwill towards others -- and likewise a reluctance to hurt others. Anything wrong with that? And that's not to say that one should strive to be insincere,fawning, or politically correct. Lord knows, 'nice' when elevated to a 'cult' can result in astounding displays of hypocrisy... > Nrenka: > What we have here, people, is a failure to communicate. >Leslie41: >Not so much a failure to communicate as a failure to agree on a >definition! Defining "nice" is probably as difficult as >defining "good". Lanval: Yet the definition of the word does not seem to be quite as much a problem, as the fact that, to some, it can only have ONE meaning, and a negative one at that. If nice = kind is an acceptable definition, then how can its total absence in a person be considered not only positive ("being on the right side is enough, being nice is a waste of time, etc....) but actually be thought superior? Leslie41: I think what that patient said > about being polite actually applies much more to the concept > of "forgiveness". But that wouldn't be as convenient, considering > what the patient did to House. > > As for Snape, like House he doesn't give a hoo about being socially > accepted. I think the characters are actually very much alike. In some ways. Though I find House quite a bit funnier, and a great deal more likeable. Snape of course gets comparatively little screen time in HP, hence this is not entirely a fair comparison. Maybe Snape pets Mrs Norris when no one is looking. I wouldn't bet on it, though. It also helps to remember that a large part of House's crankiness is due to chronic excruciating pain. What's Snape's excuse again? > > Lanval: I don't see a shred of humility, or compassion, > > evident in the man. > > Leslie41: > > Oddly enough, this makes me admire him more. Humility and > compassion are actually emotions that reward those that experience > them. We feel good about ourselves, and about our actions, because > we perceive ourselves as humble and compassionate. My guess is if > we did not feel good about ourselves for exhibiting compassion, we > would quickly squelch the emotion. How many of us would perform good > works if we felt horrible about doing so? How many people would > give to charity if it did not reinforce our own self-esteem? Lanval: Frankly, I'm quite at a loss for words here. If you truly believe that every act of human compassion ever committed was done for no other reason but pure selfishness, then we have indeed arrived at a difference that can't be bridged. Leslie41: > As for him not being "compassionate," that depends on your view of > compassion. Snape commits acts of compassion, even if he does > not "feel" compassion, because it is the right thing to do. Lanval: Can you name one of those acts? Leslie41: My > guess is that he would feel that wallowing in compassion doesn't > solve anything. I'm reminded of T'Pau, the leader of the Vulcans > (Star Trek: Original Series), who presides over the death match > between Kirk and Spock in "Amok Time". McCoy complains that it's > too hot and the air is too thin on Vulcan for Kirk to be able to > fight effectively. She doesn't respond with "compassion." "The air > is the air," says T'Pau. "What can be done?" > That seems to me to be Snape's attitude in general. (We haven't > brought Vulcans into this, but of course they show as well that it > is very possible to be good without being nice.) Lanval: I'm not familiar with this episode, nor am I a Trek Fan, but I fail to see what this Vulcan's 'deal with it' attitude has to do with being 'good'. I'd call it being rational at best, supremely indifferent at worst. > Leslie41: > A large ego that to my mind is well-deserved. It's not "fashionable" > to have a large ego in our modern age. It's not "admirable". But > that's only a recent attitude. Most ancient heroes had huge egos. Lanval: Except Snape has not yet achieved hero status in canon. > > Leslie41: > > Not a reason for him to be humble, really. Any attempt at such > > would only ring false. And though Snape may not be "humble," > > neither is he a show-off. nrenka: > On the other hand, he does tend to have a kind of invincible belief > in his own perceptions of a situation being the right one. Witness > his screaming fit both in the Shack and afterwards, which basically > amounts to a Tom Cruise-esque "I know what's going on here, > Hermione, you don't--don't be facile!" The irony is intentional, > I'm sure. Leslie41: But of course that "invincible belief" is correct in this case, is it not? Cite somewhere he has a hissy fit where he's NOT correct. Lanval: Er, the one Nora just mentioned? Snape has been canonically proven to be completely, utterly wrong about Sirius. > > Leslie41: > I don't think that is likely. Snape looked like "a plant grown in > the dark". And never has he ever been shown to express any > unrealistic ideas about his appeal, to students or anyone else. I > think if he did love Lily he would not have dared to hope she loved > him back. Lanval: A large number of listees would likely disagree, judging by the recent Snape-is-a-sexy-beast posts... > But I don't think he loved her. That's a romantic idea but not to > my mind a logical one. Lanval: Far be it from me to ever think of the words 'Snape' and 'romantic' in the same context! Whatever -- if anything -- went on between Lily and Snape, it bears a distinct mark of creepiness for me. Snape, IMO, displays the perfect personality traits of a stalker. > Leslie41: > I think all the explanation we need for Snape JOINING the DE is that > Snape was a tormented outsider, humiliated and violated by > the "popular kids" in school. The appeal of the Death Eaters is the > same appeal of the "Trenchcoat Mafia", and the Nazis. Lanval: No. A loud, resounding NO. James and Sirius cannot be held responsible for Snape joining the DE. To say that their actions caused Snape pain is correct; to say that their actions contributed to Snape's 'contra mundum' attitude, his contempt and rage against everything and everyone, is possible. But to claim that we must look no further than to Snape's status as a victim of James and Sirius would be, IMO, simplistic beyond belief. And it, as usual, absolves poor Sevvie of all personal responsibility. > As for why he felt remorse, we don't have the details, but in truth > we don't need them, really. Snape had an epiphany, where he > realized that he was "better" than that, and that no matter how > powerful and accepted he felt, what he was doing was wrong. Lanval: It's a possibility, certainly. One of many. I would argue, though, that some of us do desire details. Snape having an epiphany about being "wrong" is a concept that I find hard to swallow without further explanation. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 20:03:35 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 20:03:35 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152892 > >>Betsy Hp: > > Based on Harry's NEWT Potion class in HBP > > either Snape's students get "Outstandings" on their OWLs in high > > numbers, or those who manage the required grade all want to > > continue with Potions. > >>Neri: > I'm curious how did you figure that out from Harry's NEWT class? Betsy Hp: Because ten students in Harry's NEWT potions class achieved an Outstanding on their OWL. That would mean that a quarter of his class achieved the highest grade possible and all of them wanted to continue with Potions. Or, *over* a quarter of his class achieved the highest grade possible but decided not to continue. Either way, it's a job well done by Snape. At least, IMO. > >>Corey: > I disagree with you Betsy, I don't think for an instant that > McGonagall mistreats Harry nearly as much as Snape. > Betsy Hp: I'm not saying that McGonagall treats Harry worse than Snape does. I'm saying that, for me, McGonagall is a scarier teacher than Snape. Both McGonagall and Snape are strict. But they have different ways of disciplining their students: Snape uses ridicule and sarcasm; McGonagall uses shame and shunning. I'd prefer the former. Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 20:24:40 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 20:24:40 -0000 Subject: Yo-Yo, Thimble, Mouth-organ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152893 Megan wrote: > Didn't Dumbledore (and I am quoting from memory here), that these > objects were unimportant to the present time and that he had already > looked into these things? Carol responds: You may be thinking of DD's response to Harry, who expects to se the mouthorgan or one of the other confiscated objects where the ring had been after a previous Pensieve excursion: "The mouthorgan was only ever a mouthorgan." > Megan: > In a way, I think we are trying too hard to read into what these simple objects mean. In an orphanage, and to other children, simple objects are meaningful. These objects were important in some way to the children from whom Tom took them. Maybe it was the only thing the child owned that was not stipened out by the Orphanage, or maybe the objects were the only peice they had left from the family. Whatever they were, they were meaningful AT THE TIME only. Carol responds: I agree essentially with this view. Tom was taking "trophies" that were valuable only to their possessors, probably for the reasons you cited, but he was not merely stealing the objects to add emotional pain to the physical pain he had already inflicted. To him the objects were souvenirs of his victories over his powerless fellow orphans. I think DD says something to this effect though I don't recall the exact quotation. Megan: > He was also told to return the objects to the people whom they belonged to. I do believe, however, that these were the precursers to the Horicruxes. Tom/Voldy realized then that taking personal objects from people gave you a certain power over them. Then, when Tom became Voldermort, he realized by associating a bit of his soul to a maningful object through a murder, gave it any more power. > > Has anyone realized that, in the memories, the horocruxes he made and the people he killed to form said Horicrux, were all the OWNERS of the objects. Carol: Yes and no. The known Horcruxes (except the diary and Nagini) are all valuable objects in themselves, made of incorruptable gold and possessing magical powers of their own and/or a connection either to Voldemort's own Slytherin ancestry or to the history of Hogwarts. So, yes, the ring, the locket, and the cup did have personal meaning to the people he stole them from, but they had meaning to him, too. Also, Tom didn't kill Morfin or use his murder to make the ring Horcrux. He must have used the most important recent murder, that of his father, who was a Muggle and had no connection with Marvolo Gaunt's ring. And he killed Hepzibah Smith to acquire two potential Horcruxes, the locket and the cup. Even if he considered her death important enough to use for the making of a Horcrux (probably the cup because of Hepzibah's descent from Helga Hufflepuff), the other Horcrux still required another murder. As for the diary, he bought it himself from a Muggle shop. He didn't steal it from a victim. I think, and I know I'm in the minority here, that he used Moaning Myrtle's murder to create it. (The Basilisk was his weapon or instrument, just as the poisoned mead was Draco's instrument. If someone set a venomous snake loose in a classroom and that snake killed someone, whether or not that person was the intended victim, surely the person who set the snake loose would be guilty of murder?) At any rate, if I'm right, Myrtle would be important not in herself but because she was Tom's very first murder. Having killed her, IMO, helped him get up the "nerve" to kill his father and grandparents. And having killed them made any further murders a piece of cake. Anyway, I've strayed from the point, which is that Hepzibah Smith is the only murder victim who actually owned a Horcrux (which may or may not have been made from her murder). There's a lot we don't know, including how long after a murder is committed the Horcrux can be made and how Voldemort, having committed three murders at one time (the Riddles), could choose which one to use for a particular Horcrux. (Surely he didn't know which soul piece resulted from his father's murder as opposed to his grandfather's or grandmother's.) We don't know when he made the diary into a Horcrux. (It was apparently intended originally as an instrument for killing Muggleborns at Hogwarts and "continuing Salazar Slytherin's noble work." When was the "mere memory" reinforced by a soul bit?) We do know that he killed Myrtle near the end of his fifth year and the Riddles the following summer, when he was still sixteen. We know that he had not yet learned about Horcruxes (he's wearing the ring he stole from Morfin when he asks Slughorn how they're made). He can have made at most two Horcruxes when he shows up at Hepzibah Smith's house looking thinner and paler but still strikingly handsome. Perhaps he had not yet made any, though he has certainly split his soul often enough to make three or four. (Her murder makes the fourth or fifth.) And he has almost certainly made at least four Horcruxes (diary, ring, cup, and locket) when he shows up ten years later to apply for the DADA post at Hogwarts looking blurred and red-eyed. If we accept JKR's math here and assume that a soul can somehow be divided into equal sevenths even before seven murders have been committed and that unimportant murders have no effect on the size of the soul pieces placed in the Horcruxes, he has at this point lost at least 4/7 of his soul, and, judging from appearances, 4/7 of whatever humanity he had to begin with along with it. At that point, he disappears, apparently leaving England to consort with the Darkest of wizards. (Grindelvold is already dead.) When he returns in the early 1970s, at about the time that MWPP/S are starting school at Hogwarts, he apparently has made at least one more Horcrux, perhaps two if DD is mistaken about his intending to make his last Horcrux with Harry's murder. If I'm reading the evidence correctly, he already has the snakelike appearance that we see in GoF. He seems to regard his resurrected body as his own body restored; there's no indication of shock on the part of the DEs at his snakelike features; and his face is snakelike when it appears out the back of Quirrell's head. This final alteration in his appearance seems too extreme to be the result of only one Horcrux. IMO, DD is wrong and LV has already made all six of his Horcruxes at this point, and one of them is Nagini, which accounts both for his appearance and his extremely strong affinity with her. It also accounts for her ability to withstand possession without dying like Quirrell and the rats and snakes that Vapor!mort possessed before his restoration. Megan: What if, and this is off the wall, that the INVISIBILITY cloak was an object of GRIFFENDOR??? I know this is a CRAZY idea but it is a semi-reasonable one. We all have been searching our brains to figure out what object could be Griffendor's. Carol: It's possible. But how would LV know about James Potter's Invisibility Cloak, much less that it was an heirloom of Gryffindor? (We've been told that Harry isn't the Heir of Gryffindor, so James couldn't be, either. Dumbledore is a more likely candidate, and LV would have wanted the Sword of Gryffindor, which he failed to obtain, both for its associations with the fourth founder and because of its value and magical powers. The Invisibility Cloak would be less suitable simply because it's so insubstantial even if it had proven Gryffindor associations. I think that many posters are operating on a misconception. The Horcrux does not need to be directly associated with the murder or present at the murder scene. Hepzibah's murder could not have been used for both the cup and locket Horcruxes, so whichever soul bit was chosen for the locket Horcrux must have been the result of the murder of a person not present when the locket was stolen. Possibly it was the bit that was split off when Tom killed his grandfather three or four years previously. Certainly, the cup was not present at that murder. Another point, too, that I don't think has been sufficiently considered. Tom did not kill his family with the intention of using their murders to create Horcruxes. He may not even have known what Horcruxes were at that point. He killed them for revenge. And he was not even planning to do that much when he went to Little Hangleton looking for Marvolo Gaunt. It was only through Morfin's babbling about Tom's resemblance to "that Muggle" who ran away with his sister that he learned where his father lived. At that point, he stunned Morfin, stole his ring, borrowed his wand to commit the murder (which turned into three murders), then returned the wand and implanted the false memory. The ring was a souvenir of his crime and a family heirloom that he no doubt considered rightfully his despite Morfin's prior claim, but it could not have been, at that point, an intended Horcrux since he didn't have a clear idea of what a Horcrux was or how to make one. So I don't think that LV was after any particular object, Invisibility Cloak or otherwise, at Godric's Hollow. He had, IMO, one purpose: thwarting the Prophecy by killing Harry. If he also intended to make a Horcrux from Harry's death, that would only be icing on the cake. Kill the Prophecy boy and he's immortal, with or without a sixth Horcrux. Or so he would have thought. Carol From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 20:53:03 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 20:53:03 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152894 > > Leslie41: > > But of course that "invincible belief" is correct in this case, > > is it not? Cite somewhere he has a hissy fit where he's NOT > > correct. > > Nora: > Excuse me? > > Hermione raises the objection that hey, maybe Sirius Black isn't > actually the murderer responsible for the Potters' deaths and all > of that, and that it might be worth listening to his story. Snape > screams at her and refuses to listen. When she brings up this > potential again in the Hospital Wing, he tells her to 'shut up, > you silly girl'. Leslie41: Oh, I'm not talking about what he thinks about Sirius Black, which is, I would point out, what nearly everyone else in the wizarding world thinks about Sirius Black as well. Snape's not angry because he thinks Sirius is guilty. That's only part of it. Go back and look look at "Owl Post Again." Snape is furious because he believes that Harry has helped Sirius escape. DD suggests that perhaps Black disapparated. That's when Snape starts screaming. What he screams is: "He didn't disapparate." "This has something to do with Potter." "They helped him escape, I know it." "You don't know Potter. He did it. I know he did it." Where, in those statements, is Snape wrong? He is perfectly, and clearly CORRECT in ALL of those assessments. Yes, he was wrong about Black laying a confundus charm, but neither he nor any of the other adults, by Dumbledore's admission, would believe anything Hermione or any other 13-year-old would say about it, in light of the other evidence. The evidence is all with Snape. And he doesn't have a hissy fit, not then. He talks to Fudge about it, calmly and rationally. > Nora: > One of the things that makes the entire scene work, both in the > Shack and in the Hospital Wing, is that we (and Hermione) > *actually* know more than Snape does, and he's thus responsible > for making himself look like an ass (see comments to Fudge and > subsequent fit of spitting rage). Leslie41: I don't think he looks like an ass, personally. I feel a bit sorry for him, because he went to the Shrieking Shack, tried to capture an escaped criminal and protect a bunch of kids, and the kids he tried to save let the criminal out. Meanwhile, his mentor seems to be siding with the kids. I'd be upset as well. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 21:03:07 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:03:07 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152895 > Lanval: > If nice = kind is an acceptable definition, then how can its total > absence in a person be considered not only positive ("being on the > right side is enough, being nice is a waste of time, etc....) but > actually be thought superior? Leslie41: But I don't agree that nice = kind. > > Leslie41: > > > As for him not being "compassionate," that depends on your view > > of compassion. Snape commits acts of compassion, even if he > > does not "feel" compassion, because it is the right thing to do. > > Lanval: > Can you name one of those acts? Leslie41: If one defines "compassion" as the awareness of suffering and the wish to stop it, or to prevent it, I can name many. Starting with his work as a spy, and his attempts to save Harry's life. There are many others. Merely refusing to grant Umbridge the veritaserum, for example. > Er, the one Nora just mentioned? Snape has been canonically proven > to be completely, utterly wrong about Sirius. See my post in answer to Nora. > > Leslie41: > > I think all the explanation we need for Snape JOINING the DE is > > that Snape was a tormented outsider, humiliated and violated by > > the "popular kids" in school. The appeal of the Death Eaters is > > the same appeal of the "Trenchcoat Mafia", and the Nazis. > > Lanval: > No. A loud, resounding NO. James and Sirius cannot be held > responsible for Snape joining the DE. Leslie41: Where did I say they should be held responsibile? I'm explaining why I think Snape joined the Death Eaters, not defending him for doing so. > Lanval: > To say that their actions caused Snape pain is correct; to say > that their actions contributed to Snape's 'contra mundum' > attitude, his contempt and rage against everything and everyone, > is possible. But to claim that we must look no further than to > Snape's status as a victim of James and Sirius would be, IMO, > simplistic beyond belief. And it, as usual, absolves poor Sevvie > of all personal responsibility. Leslie41: Nothing James, or Sirius, or Tobias ever did to Snape absolves him of responsibility. Snape knows that, and I think that is why he is working for the defeat of Voldemort. From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 21:00:34 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:00:34 -0000 Subject: Hufflepuff!Neville (was Re: Neville's problems) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > > In a lot of ways, I believe that Neville would have been better- off > as a Hufflepuff or a Ravenclaw. He seems to get along splendidly > with Professor Sprout, and Professor Flitwick doesn't come across > as...shall we say, _forbidding?_...a character as Professor > McGonagall. > Good points -- and ones that JKR herself might agree with, or at least might have agreed with at one time. As I recall when she showed examples of her early notebooks, Neville was listed as being in Hufflepuff. I suspect what we have here is an example of different layers of development. Neville-that-was, i.e. Hufflepuff!Neville, was probably an early attempt to create characters who embodied stereotypes of the various houses as Harry does Gryffindor and Draco does Slytherin. Neville would have been the stereotypical Hufflepuff and another character (perhaps the very earliest incarnation of Hermione) would have been a stereotypical Ravenclaw. I suspect that as time went on, various things happened. For one thing, as she thought about some of the characters, Neville in this instance, they evolved beyond original stereotypes to an extent. For another, JKR was probably faced with problems of keeping the narrative tight and focused. In order to do that, she may well have decided that Gryffindor and Slytherin were the most important houses for the story, and therefore any major characters in the first few books would have to be in one of those two houses. Therefore Hufflepuff!Neville switched houses, grew something of a backbone, and became the Neville-who-is. But I think most of Neville's personality was evolved when he was still very much Hufflepuff!Neville, and that comes through again and again. Neville really DOESN'T fit all that well into Gryffindor because he originally wasn't meant to BE a Gryffindor, and most of his personality and behavior is representative of that stereotypical Hufflepuff who now only exists in JKR's notebooks. Neville really DOESN'T fit well with McGonagall because he wasn't originally supposed to BE one of McGonagall's charges. He was supposed to be Professor Sprout's charge -- and as you say he would have fitted there much better. But, for the sake of the narrative, JKR needed to put all of her heroes in one house, and hence do many of Neville's problems arise. Lupinlore From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 21:52:41 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:52:41 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP16, A Very Frosty Christmas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152897 > >>SSSusan: > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 16: A Very Frosty Christmas > > QUESTIONS > 1. Why the heck does Harry never look anything up? Clearly, he's > curious about the Unbreakable Vow. Why not grab a book? Why not > ask the librarian? Betsy Hp: To be fair to Harry, he leaves for the Burrow the morning directly following Slughorn's party. So he doesn't actually have time to go to the library. Also, I don't know that Harry was all that curious about the Vow. Draco had blown it off, and it's not until Ron seems so stunned by the implications that Harry seems to think it's important. > 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted > Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to > get Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they > were doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been > about 7) would've learned about UVs? Betsy Hp: I imagine they picked it up from their dad, because of his work in the Ministry, or possibly Bill, with his work as a curse breaker. Either way, I doubt the twins really *knew* what they were doing. I totally imagine them getting Ron to swear to be their slave for life or other sibling type thing. ("I swear I'll always do your chores" or "I swear I'll only answer to 'Tiny little pip-squeak'" or some such thing.) It does lead me to wonder if *Draco* really knew what an Unbreakable Vow was. As an only child I'd imagine he'd be more sheltered. And he does seem singularly unimpressed with Snape doing such a thing. > 3. Is it significant that Ginny has told Fred & George about Ron > & Lav-Lav, given the "encounter" with Ron when he happened upon > her & Dean snogging? Do you think she's always talked about Ron > to F&G? Do you think she was hoping they'd transfer their "nosing > in" to Ron's love life from hers? Betsy Hp: Well, Ginny has been the twins' informant for some time now. I'm thinking of how she was the one to tell the twins about Percy dating Penelope. What is interesting to me is that Ginny and Ron seem to stop at the twins as far as older siblings go. IOWs, no one runs to tell Charlie or Bill who's dating who. And obviously, Percy isn't told either. I find it interesting because there's been a running theme of Ron trying to get in good with the twins and disassociate from Percy since the series began. It seems that maybe Ginny is trying to do the same thing. But the twins are pretty self-efficient. The closest anyone got was Ginny in OotP while they were all trapped at Grimmauld Place. She seemed one of their team at the time. But as soon as school started up again, the twins were back on their own again. Ron doesn't seem nearly as bothered at the twins ribbing as Ginny was. Perhaps Ron has matured a bit, to the point where he doesn't really need the twins approval anymore? > 4. Fred waits to call Percy a prat until after Molly has left the > kitchen. Does this show there is a side to him which cares about > others' feelings? Or does he simply fear the Wrath of Molly? Betsy Hp: I agree with Debbie that it didn't read that Fred waited until Molly left to call Percy a prat but does it *as* Molly is leaving. Though he didn't say it to his mom's face, which, for *him* is showing a bit of sensitivity. And I'd say it's more to not hurt Molly than to avoid getting yelled at. At this point I think Molly is more apt to break into tears, which I think Fred would do more to avoid than her screaming at him. > 5. What do you think of Harry's pronouncement that he's going to > tell DD and anyone who can help about Snape's offer to help > Draco? Does this signal a change in Harry re: turning to others, > relying upon others more? Betsy Hp: I think it *does* signal a change, and a good one at that. He trusts that others can help, and he realizes that sometimes he *needs* help. That's two big steps for our boy, Harry. > 6. When Ron says that DD & his dad are likely to protest that > Snape is not really intending to help Draco but is only trying to > get information from him, Harry says, "They didn't hear him. No > one's that good an actor, not even Snape." Contrast this with > Snape's statement to Draco: "Where do you think I would have been > all these years, if I had not known how to act?" It seems to me > that this is the crux of the Harry-Snape "problem" and > the "problem" for the fandom in trying to figure out Severus > Snape. *Is* he acting? When is he acting and when is he not? > How good an actor is he? Is Harry correct that "even Snape" is > not that good an actor? Betsy Hp: Obviously, Snape must present a false face at different times. However, I do think Snape hides behind the truth as often as he can. As we see in Spinner's End, he's playing an artful game. I think Snape honestly *is* trying to help Draco, and is worried about him. I think this is what Harry picks up on. The question then becomes, *how* is Snape trying to help Draco? It's interesting though, because Harry is pretty darn confident that he can read Snape, that he's got a basic understanding of the man. Considering how much Harry relates to the Prince, I wonder if Harry isn't correct in his assumptions that he can read Snape fairly well? That really the only thing Harry is missing is Snape's motivations? (For example: In PoA, Snape *did* dislike and distrust Lupin. But not for the reasons Harry thought he did.) > 7. Who do you think, in the past, has issued invitations to > Hermione for Christmas at the Burrow? Do you imagine Hermione > invited herself? Ron invited her? Mrs. Weasley? Ginny? Or that it > was simply assumed she'd go? What do you think happened this > year? Was an invitation given and declined? Was it all so awkward > between Ron & Hermione that she was not invited at all? Betsy Hp: Isn't this the first Christmas Harry's had at the Burrow? Has Hermione ever been there for Christmas? They all went to Gimmauld Place in OotP, but that was at Sirius's invitation, not the Weasleys. The rest of the time, didn't everyone either go to their own homes or stay at Hogwarts? I will say that the times Hermione has come to stay at the Burrow it's been as Ron's guest, not Ginny's. > 8. Comments on the "gnome angel"? Yet another hilarious stunt by > the twins, or yet another sign that the twins lack a conscience > and/or are cruel? Betsy Hp: Oh, the twins are most definitely cruel. And their conscience is two sizes too small, I'd say. This is the third time we've seen them tomenting an animal, though at least they didn't kill the gnome (assuming the paint didn't hurt it). (Here's hoping they don't wet the bed. ) > 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm > and welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, > finds Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez > eet over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly > not have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first > place? Betsy Hp: Oh, Fleur is definitely, hilariously rude. I imagine she's tired of all the passive-aggressive stuff Molly has been dishing out (the "no sweater for Fleur" thing was classic "I'm being *subtle*!!!!Molly) and is trying to get the fight out into the open. I really feel sorry for Fleur. I can only imagine that either Bill is worried for her safety, and figures the Burrow is the safest place for her, or Fleur is worried for Bill's safety and insists on being where he is. Either way, she's having to deal with a woman who has more emotion than tact and is determined to make her feel less than welcome. Something that interests me is that it's Arthur who jumps up to drown out Fleur's complaints. So is he the one most interested in maintaining the peace? Bill doesn't say a word. Of course, I get the sense that Arthur tries to avoid Molly and her moods as much as possible. Which I know isn't the popular view. > 10. > Additionally, Lupin makes some remarks here about Snape which > surprised some fans. Was he speaking what he truly believed? Did > you believe him? Betsy Hp: Ah, Lupin. So hard for me to get a firm grasp on him. I think Lupin would like to *think* he's telling the truth. So I don't think he's deliberatly lying. The "no comment" tact is a favorite one of Lupin's, so I don't think he's uncomfortable perching on the fence. What is interesting is that he says of Snape "We both know he wanted my job..." [333] Huh? So did Lupin never know that the DADA position was actually cursed? Or, did he know that but still thought Snape really did want the job? Did he think Snape didn't know? > 11. It is clear, to Lupin anyway, that Harry is *hoping* that the > HBP is his father. This is reinforced by the fact that Harry is > disappointed when he checks the book's date and sees it's too old > to have been his dad's era. Harry has also previously stated that > the HBP is a better potions teacher than Snape. Why does Harry > like the HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his > father? And what does all this say about Harry and Snape? Has > something changed in Snape, to have made him truly a lesser > teacher now than then? Or is it simply the removal, for Harry, of > Snape the person and their unpleasant history from the mix, so > that he's seeing "pure teaching" in the book and not the > personality of the teacher? Betsy Hp: I don't know that I'd call the Prince a teacher. These were notes written for himself, and it's not like Harry is getting a firm grasp on *why* the various techniques and changes scribbled in the book work. However, I do think Harry connects with the Prince. He appreciates his style, I think. And that's why he's hoping the Prince is his father. >From the Pensieve memory Harry received a rather strong blow in seeing that his father was not a boy who he would have related to. While this Prince guy is (just as Harry related to the young Snape in the pensieve). I do think Snape and Harry are an awful lot alike. Which is part of the reason they clash so badly with each other. They get stubborn on similar things and each refuses to yield. But here, without the "unpleasant history", they finally get a chance to meet on common ground. Gosh, I'm looking forward to book 7 when the full implications of this will hopefully get a chance to manifest. > 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? Betsy Hp: No. The chaos would be grand at first, but they'd eventually find themselves the hunted. Especially when the wizards went on no-holds- barred attack. As they would after a bit. > 13. Are you surprised Molly falls for the story that Percy > couldn't stand to not see his family since they were in the > neighborhood? Why or why not? Betsy Hp: Molly *has* to believe Percy. It would break her heart if she couldn't. I'm not a huge fan of Molly, but I felt for her in this scene. What was interesting is how Arthur reacted. No matter Molly's feelings, it looks like Arthur is quite unwilling to welcome his lost son back into the fold. Is Arthur really that unforgiving? If so, I think it looks a bit bad on Arthur. It was Arthur who started the fight in the first place. Why was he so angry at Percy for getting a promotion? Why is he so angry at Percy for continuing to work for the very same people he works for? How could he possibly still maintain that Percy is supposed to spy on the family? > 14. Percy could be so many things. What do you think? Is he > good but misguided? Is he ESE? Is he just a prat? What explains > his behavior? Is he embarrassed? proud? ambitious? hurt? Betsy Hp: What Debbie said. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152847 > 15. In the final scene of the chapter, Harry first senses and > then knows that Scrimgeour is after something, and he is > determined not to give it to him. We see a Harry who I would > argue is self-possessed, confident, forceful, and quite "adult" in > sticking up for what he believes is right. Were you surprised at > the growth he displayed, or was this just exactly what you would > have expected from him? What did you think of Harry in this scene? Betsy Hp: I don't think Scrimgeour was really all that subtle so I don't think it was that hard for Harry to realize he was after something. However, I *loved* how Harry handled it. It was great how he didn't say a word to help Scrimgeour along and made Scrimgeour do all the work. Harry really did appear much more adult, and while I'm not sure I'd have predicted it, it does fit his character. I'm really glad he learned from his mistakes in OotP. > 16. What do you think of Scrimgeour now? Compare him to Fudge, if > you like. Betsy Hp: He's an interesting character. You can definitely see that he was once an Auror. He seemed to play both good and bad cop in this scene. I didn't get the sense that Scrimgeour was really trying to hide the ball so much as put a better face on what was really a full frontal attack, so I didn't take points away for lack of subtlety. [An aside: Why did he bring Percy along? He could have just dropped in to say hi to Arthur. Does one need a member of the family playing escort to get past the wards, maybe?] And what did Scrimgeour mean when he said he'd wanted to meet Harry for a "very long time"? He even repeats that it's been a very long time. Does six months count as a "very long time" or has he been interested in meeting Harry for longer than we've known him? Why does Dumbledore see this as a bad thing? Is Scrimgeour just interested in Harry as a figure head (which would make sense if he didn't know about the prophecy) or does he realize that Harry is going to have a bigger role to play? And if Scrimgeour is really so very interested in Harry, why does he make such a colossal mistake in bringing up Umbridge? He didn't have to mention her by name, so why does he? I can't imagine that the enmity between Umbridge and Harry was a great big secret. She spent most of the school year trying to get Harry expelled. So why does Scrimgeour draw Harry's attention to the fact that he knows and converses with the woman who banned Harry from quidditch for life? > Siriusly Snapey Susan, > who would like to thank Penapart Elf, Potioncat, Jen R., Alla & > Carol for their comments, suggestions and/or encouragement. Betsy Hp: Excellent discussion, SSSusan, thanks! Betsy Hp From a_svirn at yahoo.com Thu May 25 21:53:14 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:53:14 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152898 > Alla: > Mcgonagall does not tell Neville that > he needs to change anything in him, she does not tell him that he is > clumsy idiot, or moronic, but that his work IS good, except he lacks > confidence. a_svirn: Yes, she does. She wants him to acquire confidence somehow. ASAP. > Alla: > Okay, maybe it is not full blown compliment, but IMO it is atruthful > assesment meaning to inspire such. a_svirn: Oh? Then what's wrong with the Snape's comment? He stated that in his considered opinion everyone (Neville included) could scrape a pass grade. Surely a confidence boost of no common order. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu May 25 22:09:08 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 22:09:08 -0000 Subject: Hermione the "know-it-all" (Was: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers) In-Reply-To: <43a.2196f62.31a64678@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152899 Clare wrote: > Can I give a teacher's perspective here? I teach English Literature and Language to 11-18 yr olds. > > For the record, Hermione would annoy the hell out of me. I had one and although she knew the answers, she was self-obsessed and the teacher has to give others their chance, no, their right to participate and communicate. One cannot always pander to the know it all, they will succeed anyway and there are others who need to be pushed, prodded and forced along the road to comprehension. Carol responds: I was an English teacher for eighteen years at the university level and one year ("The horror!") at the high school level, so I appreciate your perspective, especially the part relating to the House system, which is entirely outside my experience. But I was also, I'm sorry to say, aomething of a Hermione once upon a time--hand in the air before the words are out of the teacher's mouth, knowing exactly what the teacher is going to ask and what the answer is. I must have been exceedingly annoying. I can think of at least three teachers who thought so, all female, none of them Snapes. However, I never had to suffer a Hermione of my own in the years I taught, only woefully ignoratn students who had to be taught to examine a work of literature critically and untaught the five-paragraph theme. I do see your point, however, about the damage to a class in which one student has all the answers and everyone else is either too discouraged or too lazy to respond. ("I don't know, but I think Hermione does. Why not ask her?") I'm starting to rethink my statement about Grubbly-Plank being an exemplary teacher. I still think she's the best we've seen, but she seems perfectly willing to keep awarding points to Hermione without, to use your term, "prodding" and "pushing" the other students to learn the material. Since the points are awarded to Gryffindor as a House, the other Gryffindors don't even need to make an effort. Hermione will win points and they can keep their own ignorance unexposed--not to mention that she's providing the information they need to know without their even opening a book. (Of course, I'm talking about CoMC here, which is rather different from English literature or composition, but much the same thing happens in Charms and Transfiguration and even in Potions once Slughorn is teaching the class.) Even more disturbing, when she's not mad at Ron and Harry, Hermione practically writes their essays for them. They seldom crack open a book (until the HBP seduces Harry into an interest in Potions) and they cheat on their Divination homework by making up answers because Hermione isn't in the class. Ron says something along the lines of, "But if you don't help us, we'll fail our OWLs! Do you want that on your conscience?" (Lovely bit of irony there.) Is Hermione really helping them? How is what she's doing any different from Harry's using the HBP's notes to get unearned praise and high marks in Slughorn's Potions class? Now, granted, Ron and Harry wouldn't have gotten past the Devil's Snare, or even past the locked door, in SS/PS if it hadn't been for Hermione, and she figured out that the monster in CoS was a Basilisk traveling through the pipes. She made important contributions, perhaps not quite so significant, in the other books as well, and she would have deterred Harry from going to the MoM if she could. But in terms of Ron's and Harry's education, she may have done more harm than good. If she had not befriended them, they might have been forced to study on their own. Spells, of course, must be practiced and can't be faked, but theory and background information are another matter. Has Harry really learned anything about the history of magic or astronomy or potions? Has he learned anything, aside from some extremely useful defensive spells like Expelliarmus and the Patronus Charm, except how to escape from Grindylows and Kappas and what a Bezoar is? Would Ron and Harry have earned more OWLs if Hermione hadn't been there? Would they have actually understood the material rather than repeating back Hermione's notes? Would Harry have been able to figure out Golpalott's Law if he'd had to study Potions on his own in earlier years? If Harry and Ron survive and want to train as Aurors, surely they'll need to really know the material, not just defensive spells but the theory and practice of Potions, Transfiguration, Charms, Herbology, and DADA. And despite their E's in those subjects (and Harry's O in DADA), I'm not sure that they've really learned those subjects, at least not the part that involves book learning, and certainly not how to use the material creatively, to analyze and synthesize and make it their own. Maybe it's not Hermione's fault. Maybe it's the Hogwarts curriculum that's to bleme. But I don't think she's done them any service by "helping" them to pass their classes or their OWLs, and if they ever get their NEWTs, I hope it will be through their own efforts and not hers. Carol, starting to wonder if the material is worth learning, anyway, and wishing the Hogwarts curriculum had a humanities component From drednort at alphalink.com.au Thu May 25 23:03:46 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 09:03:46 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Snape WAS:Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers. In-Reply-To: <000601c67fd1$e7421d40$63fe54d5@Marion> Message-ID: <4476C472.7136.385BC2F@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152900 On 25 May 2006 at 10:04, Marion Ros wrote: > Oh, hear! Hear! > > Hermione soooo irritates me. I don't think she's particularly bright either. > I'm a member of Mensa, and my experience (and those of my fellow > clubmembers) is that really intelligent children either do their own quiet > thing or 'play dumb' to fit in the crowd. I'm all for more attention to the > bright child (raise the bar high!) but that's because they generally don't > *demand* time while they do need it. Children like Hermione, whose only aim > in life seems to be to impress adults (and what *is* her thing with > faillure? I'd like to speak with her parents. Amazing too that she often ops > to spend holidays away from them too, but I digress), children like Hermione > *needs* to be slapped down occasionally. They can take it (they wouldn't be > such a gloryhound "look-at-me" irritating little know-it-alls if they were > fragile little butterflies, would they?) > Snape is *good* for her. > Although I fear that miss Granger has too thick a skin to ever *learn* from > the experience. Hi Marion, I'm afraid I really have to disagree with you. I am also a Mensan - and more than a Mensan (my IQ is in the 'profoundly gifted' range -I'm not boasting, but it's a matter of public record and it's relevant to this discussion). I have worked with gifted children for over a decade. I have had articles published on giftedness, I have written a chapter of a book on giftedness, I have been interviewed by one of Australia's major newspapers on giftedness, I've run seminars on issues related to giftedness for Gifted Resources in Australia at the Centre for the Exceptional Learner, and I am certified as a teacher of gifted children (though until I get my Education degree at the end of this year, I can't actually use that certification to teach - it stacks on top of a degree). In short, I know quite a bit about gifted children. And I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Hermione is a gifted child. Probably an exceptionally gifted or profoundly gifted child (IQ 160 minimum). And I'm not the only person who thinks so. A lot of experts on gifted children believe Hermione is a clear example of a gifted child. It is true that a significant number of gifted children are quiet and unassuming and a significant number also do 'play dumb' in order to fit in. Those are not uncommon characteristics of very bright children. But they are not universal characteristics. Not all gifted children fall into those patterns, by any means. It depends on the child's personality. It depends on the child's early school experiences. But there are plenty of highly intelligent children who are also high achievers. It's hard to say whether they are a majority or a minority of gifted children - because identifying the underachievers can be very difficult, and so it's hard to know how many there are - but the mere fact that Hermione doesn't play dumb and doesn't hide her light under a bushel, is certainly *not* an indication that she's not gifted. Of the roughly 30 gifted children I have mentored over the last decade, 8 have fallen into the Hermione like category. It's a minority in my experience - but it's a significant minority. As for Hermione's relationship with her parents... I have to say when I've seen gifted kids like Hermione - highly driven, extremely worried about failure and trying to avoid their parents... well, sometimes that's a sign that the parents push their child too much. But more often, in my experience, it's a sign the parents are trying to hold their child back. I don't mean the latter in a bad sense - most often when that happens, the parents are truly and sincerely interested in their child's welfare and are trying to contain the child *because* they believe the child is pushihng themselves too hard - and they may very well be correct about that. It's not particularly psychologically healthy to constantly expect yourself to be the best - perfectionism can be a real problem. But when you have a highly driven, highly gifted child, no matter how much their parents may be trying to do what is right for them, the kid may not see things that way. I wouldn't be at all surprised if part of the reason for Hermione's estrangement from her parents is because she feels they are trying to hold her back. Trying to stop her from being the best. And they might very well be doing so. And they might have very good reason for doing so - but Hermione is very much the type to be very resistant to this. Especially as, it's possible (and quite common for highly gifted children) she spent her early schooling wondering why she didn't fit in - and then suddenly she found a different world where she did. I think Hogwarts may also be a factor in Hermione's actions. My own school experiences - well, until I was 12, I was quite desperately unhappy and didn't fit into my education - and I was one of those kids who hid what they could do, and dumbed down to some extent. At 13, I suddenly found myself at a very different school. For the first time I was studying things I didn't know before, and being pushed to learn at levels I didn't know before, in an environment where you had every opportunity to excel. That is what Hermione has found at Hogwarts, I think. And when a gifted child finds that niche - even the underachievers often turn into achievers overnight. Part of the reason so many gifted kids do dumb down is because of an inappropriate educational fit - for some of these kids (by no means all) the type of school environment we see at Hogwarts is exactly what they need - and it changes them. 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 enlil65 at gmail.com Thu May 25 22:57:02 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:57:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Predictions about book 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1789c2360605251557o5117790bn782c63e858950e83@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152901 On 5/25/06, eggplant107 wrote: Eggplant: > 1)Book 7 will be published on July 13 2007, the same day as the next > movie. Peggy W: I like Alla's 07/07/07 for it's numeric coolness, but personally I'm hoping for 7/25/07 just because it's my birthday. Well at least I get the HBP paperback this year. :) Eggplant: > 5)Snape loved Lilly Potter and that's the reason he hates Harry not > because he looks like James, Snape blames Harry for Lilly's death. Peggy W: My bet is on Peter Pettigrew as Lily-lover, because it seems to answer quite a few nagging questions. Peter could have asked Lily be spared in exchange for revealing the Potters' location to Voldemort; he could have quickly told Dumbledore what happened as part of the plan to save himself, right before running off to frame Sirius, which answers the question of how word got out so quickly. It also seems consistent with his personality. Eggplant: > 6)Dumbledore trusted Snape because he detected sincere grief from him > when he heard the Potters were murdered, and because 16 years ago > Snape made an unbreakable vow to protect the life of their only child. Peggy W: Personally I don't think simple remorse is enough reason for Dumbledore to trust Snape, I think there must be a more concrete reason for that. I say "more concrete" because Snape could simply be telling a tale of remorse--I see that as a cover story, the story he tells Bella at Spinners End. Eggplant: > 9)Harry's Patronus will change from a stag to a phoenix, probably near > the end of the book. Peggy W: I disagree with this prediction, only because it would seem to represent abandoning his father and family ties, which I don't think Harry would want to do. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Thu May 25 23:32:34 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:32:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 In-Reply-To: <41a.22ca655.31a657d9@aol.com> Message-ID: <20060525233234.59933.qmail@web37205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152902 Randy: >> I think this may be a possible ending for Book Seven. A dead Voldemort forces Harry to be considered a murderer, but an eternally trapped Voldy is much more effective. Harry will not have become a trained assassin as his legacy from Hogwarts. Clare: Murderer? My grandfather isn't alive anymore, so I shall take offence on his behalf. He killed a great many people during WW2, having been in most of the major battles. Catherine now: I have to agree whole-heartedly with Clare on this and add a little something. There is a big difference between killing in war-time and murder. Yes, Harry will have to plan and "pre-meditate" how to kill Voldemort. You don't just off the most powerful evil wizard of all time without a plan. That's plain stupid. But this is still WAR. And killing Voldemort will SAVE a lot of people, so I really don't understand the "Harry-can't -be-a-murderer" camp. Personally I think it would be irresponsible for Harry (a.k.a. Prophesy Boy) not to kill Voldemort. He's been destined to do it, so get on with it and do it. And I doubt I'll shed a tear for Voldemort either, JKR would have to really pull something out of her hat to make me feel for Him. In any case, for those who fear for Harry's soul, think of it this way: Voldemort isn't even human anymore. He has torn himself away from humanity willingly, using the killing of others to his advantage. The bible allows for killing in self-defense, defending your family or your country. Harry killing Voldemort falls in to all three of those things. Is it really murder to prepare yourself against a person who has tried to kill you 6 times and once as a baby? Would you feel better if Voldemort popped out from behind a bookshelf at Floorish and Blotts and Harry killed him inadvertently by dropping a piano on his head? Harry has already killed Quirrell, without splitting his soul, although that was luck. He will kill Voldemort, without damaging his soul, and hopefully surviving to lead a long and happy life with Ginny, have 12 kids and become minister for Magic! Catherine (Hoping that another one of Trelawny's predictions comes true!) __________________________________________________ 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 drednort at alphalink.com.au Thu May 25 23:36:32 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 09:36:32 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: References: <20060525111654.77155.qmail@web86206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4476CC20.14789.3A3BC56@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152903 On 25 May 2006 at 13:33, dumbledore11214 wrote: > Alla: > > As I said in the past, Shawn, I am talking about extreme cases of > harm only. I know on that we disagree, but that's how I feel. If the > choice is between majority getting the teacher which is good for them > and several students ending up permanently harmed as the result, I > prefer majority not getting the teacher which is good for them. I > always bring the example of teacher giving perfect education to > forty students and let's say killing one of them. I do NOT think that > such teacher should be allowed to teach. Shaun: In theory, I don't disagree with you. I can certainly agree that it's possible for a teacher to be *so* bad with regards to even one student that it does cancel out all the good they might do with other students. And in those cases, then, yes, I would want the teacher removed. A teacher who killed a student would definitely qualify. But the thing is, I really don't see this happening with regards to Snape and any of his students. Yes, Neville, I think does experience negatives from his time in Snape's classes - but it's nowhere near the level of 'extreme cases of harm' that I can see. Neville doesn't seem to me to learn effectively in Snape's classes, and he gets upset by being in them - but that's not extreme harm. Nowhere near. I was severely harmed by some of my school experiences. I work with kids who've been extremely harmed by some of their school experiences. I know, first hand, that it happens. But I don't see it happening to Neville. I really don't. That's a matter of opinion and you are, of course, quite free to hold a different opinion. But I just don't see it. But it's also important to realise that it's not solely the teacher that is at issue when a child is harmed by a particular teaching experience. If that child is being unusually harmed in comparison to the other children, it's at least likely to be because there's something unusual about the child. That was certainly the case with me, and it's the case with the kids I work with. Neville is a boy whose parents were horribly tortured to the point of insanity - a boy who all indications are has to visit them regularly so it's not something like a death that you can often put behind you. Blaming a teacher for the emotional problems of a boy with that in his past, seems to me to be quite odd. I think it's relevant to look at "'There's one - the Cruciatus Curse,' said Neville in a small but distinct voice. Moody was looking very intently at Neville, this time with both eyes. 'Your name's Longbottom?' he said, his magical eye swooping down to check the register again. Neville nodded nervously, but Moody made no further inquiries. Turning back to the class at large, he reached into the jar for the next spider and placed it upon the desktop, where it remained motionless, apparently too scared to move. 'The Cruciatus Curse,' said Moody. 'Needs to be a bit bigger for you to get the idea,' he said, pointing his wand at the spider. 'Engorgio!' The spider swelled. It was now larger than a tarantula. Abandoning all pretense, Ron pushed his chair backward, as far away from Moody's desk as possible. Moody raised his wand again, pointed it at the spider, and muttered, 'Crucio!' At once, the spider's legs bent in upon its body; it rolled over and began to twitch horribly, rocking from side to side. No sound came from it, but Harry was sure that if it could have given voice, it would have been screaming. Moody did not remove his wand, and the spider started to shudder and jerk more violently. 'Stop it!' Hermione said shrilly. Harry looked around at her. She was looking, not at the spider, but at Neville, and Harry, following her gaze, saw that Neville's hands were clenched upon the desk in front of him, his knuckles white, his eyes wide and horrified." (GoF, p189-190). This illustrates an important point in my view. Neville has been severely affected by his past - and there's no reason he shouldn't have been. He has horrible experiences in his past. And *sometimes* those experiences have an impact on how he responds in class to different experiences - and blaming the teacher for his unusual responses really is putting the blame in the wrong place. And it's not just Neville - it's less drastic and dramatic - but Ron flees the spider. His past experiences have left him with a horror of spiders - and so he responds differently to those. And: "'Avada Kedavra!' Moody roared. There was a flash of blinding green light and a rushing sound, as though a vast, invisible something was soaring through the air - instantaneously the spider rolled over onto its back, unmarked, but unmistakably dead. Several of the students stifled cries; Ron had thrown himself backward and almost toppled off his seat as the spider skidded toward him. Moody swept the dead spider off the desk onto the floor. 'Not nice,' he said calmly. 'Not pleasant. And there's no countercurse. There's no blocking it. Only one known person has ever survived it, and he's sitting right in front of me.' Harry felt his face redden as Moody's eyes (both of them) looked into his own. He could feel everyone else looking around at him too. Harry stared at the blank blackboard as though fascinated by it, but not really seeing it at all... So that was how his parents had died... exactly like that spider. Had they been unblemished and unmarked too? Had they simply seen the flash of green light and heard the rush of speeding death, before life was wiped from their bodies? Harry had been picturing his parents' deaths over and over again for three years now, ever since he'd found out they had been murdered, ever since he'd found out what had happened that night: Wormtail had betrayed his parents' whereabouts to Voldemort, who had come to find them at their cottage. How Voldemort had killed Harry's father first. How James Potter had tried to hold him off, while he shouted at his wife to take Harry and run... Voldemort had advanced on Lily Potter, told her to move aside so that he could kill Harry... how she had begged him to kill her instead, refused to stop shielding her son... and so Voldemort had murdered her too, before turning his wand on Harry. Harry knew these details because he had heard his parents' voices when he had fought the dementors last year - for that was the terrible power of the dementors: to force their victims to relive the worst memories of their lives, and drown, powerless, in their own despair. Moody was speaking again, from a great distance, it seemed to Harry. With a massive effort, he pulled himself back to the present and listened to what Moody was saying." (GoF, p.190-191) The same applies for Harry - his experiences means he reacts differently to certain things than other children do. Is Moody(Crouch) to blame for what happens in that class? For what happens to Neville? For Ron fleeing the spider? For Harry losing all focus on the class? I don't think so. And I think blaming Snape for Neville's reactions in classes makes just about as much sense. Neville has demons in his past - and the blame for those demons lie with the people who did him real damage. I'm not saying Snape couldn't be nicer to Neville - I wouldn't object if he was. But Snape isn't primarily responsible for the way Neville acts. > Alla: > > Sure, as I said choosing here means involving child parents, etc, but > let's say if child has permanent nightmares as a result of being in > this teacher's class ( like to me this represents Neville's Boggart), > then yes, I think something must be done here. Oh, and you don't > think that Harry's case is rather clear too? Shaun: No, actually I don't. Harry's case to me is actually very unclear. Not because I don't think he's treated unfairly by Snape - because I do. But because I'm not sure if he's suffering any significant problems because of it. I think Harry may actually be benefitting from being in Snape's classes - he's a lot more resilient than Neville. If I was running Hogwarts, I'd probably pull Neville out of Snape's class. Potions isn't critical to all future careers, people can do well enough without it, and I don't think Neville is likely to pass it, or pass it well. Better to excuse him from the class. But Harry - well, we know Harry can pass potions and pass it well, even though it's been taught by Snape. A different situation. I had a significant number of really bad experiences with teachers when I was a child. In only one case, out of all those cases, would I, looking back, wanted to have been taken out of that teachers control. 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 ClareWashbrook at aol.com Thu May 25 22:33:18 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:33:18 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... Message-ID: <228.ad215be.31a78aae@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152904 Finwitch: Actually, she IS a teacher. She's been teaching French abroad for instance, and reached an education in Scotland - not that she's teaching now, rather doing a campaign against the cagebeds for the sake of poor orphans and writing the 7th book - but she certainly has been. As for me -- well, let me just say that there's a difference between a teacher and a lecturer. Snape IMO fits to latter category, rather than the former. Clare: No, she isn't. She taught English as a second language to adults in Portugal for a year, which is not the same as teaching children and teenagers. She then taught French for a year on supply. Supply teachers work at a school briefly and don't really teach - they manage behaviour whilst the pupils complete work set by a staff teacher. I agree that Snape would be better suited to lecturing but he does get results. Snape is one of the good guys, who has a lot of pressure on him. I think JKR meant us to sympathise with him to a certain extent. I would like to think that she is making a point that the "grammar school" style of teaching in which failure is highlighted rather than excused is actually effective, no matter how horrible the teacher seems and no matter how much the children dislike him. It does work, in the books and in RL. She could also have been making a contrary point that focusing upon results, as our current system does, allows teachers with undesirable attitudes to continue because of their good results. Perhaps it is both. Perhaps it is neither and the point merely rises out of her plot intentions. I prefer to think that she is highlighting the former but that is because I staunchly believe that excusing failure and focusing on the politically correct is destroying our education system and our culture. Snape is nasty, I'd hate to have had him as teacher but I bet I'd have learnt! smiles, Clare xx [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri May 26 00:10:51 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 00:10:51 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152905 > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > Based on Harry's NEWT Potion class in HBP > > > either Snape's students get "Outstandings" on their OWLs in high > > > numbers, or those who manage the required grade all want to > > > continue with Potions. > > > >>Neri: > > I'm curious how did you figure that out from Harry's NEWT class? > > Betsy Hp: > Because ten students in Harry's NEWT potions class achieved an > Outstanding on their OWL. That would mean that a quarter of his > class achieved the highest grade possible and all of them wanted to > continue with Potions. Or, *over* a quarter of his class achieved > the highest grade possible but decided not to continue. Either way, > it's a job well done by Snape. At least, IMO. > Neri: Why do you assume that ten students in the NEWT potions class achieved "Outstanding"? Do you think that everybody except Harry and Ron got an Outstanding? I doubt this is the case. They could get in with "Exceed Expectations" too. In fact, Hermione was obviously doing better than anybody else in the class (except for Harry, who had an unfair advantage) during the whole year, so it would be strange if all of them had an "Outstanding" like she had. Judging from Ernie's performances I doubt very much he got an Outstanding OWL. So is it because the other students had their books and ingredients ready? But maybe they simply got previous information that the standards were lowered this year. I'd expect critical information such as the minimal grade required for each NEWT class to be available for students earlier than their first day of school. It would be just like Ron to neglect checking for any updates, and Harry of course wouldn't know about it at all. Also, are ten students a quarter? JKR didn't say there are 40 students in Harry's year. She recently explained that she had created 40 students with background, but she had never decided they are the only students in Harry's year. And then she repeated the number of 600 students for the whole school. So what we know for certain is that Snape produced 12 NEWT students who got EE or higher and wanted to continue with the subject. But is this number high, low or average? The only way to know would be to compare it with the number of students in other NEWT classes. DADA, for example. How many students there are in the DADA class? Ah yes, here it is: ********************************************************* HBP, Ch. 21: "Before we start, I want your dementor essays," said Snape, waving his wand carelessly, so that twenty-five scrolls of parchment soared into the air and landed in a neat pile on his desk. ********************************************************* There are 25 students in this class. It looks like five different DADA teachers, three of them hopeless, produced more than *twice* the number of NEWT students that Snape produced during these same years. Of course, to be fair this is in great part the DA effect: ********************************************************* HBP, Ch.9: Although Snape did not know it, Harry had taught at least half the class (anybody who had been a member of the D.A.) how to perform a Shield Charm the previous year. ********************************************************* We might say that Harry, in less than a year of underground training, produced more NEWT students than Snape produced in five years of official teaching. And Harry was working with only three houses while Snape was working with all four. BTW, if I counted right there were 15 students of Harry's year in the DA. Assuming all or most of them also made it to the NEWT DADA class is indeed fully consistent with 25 students total, "at least half" of them DA members. Now, what about the Transfiguration NEWT class? I can't find how many students it contains, but I do count at least seven Gryffindors who are canonically in it: the trio, Dean, Seamus, Lavender and Parvati. Might be additional Gryffindors that weren't mentioned, but at least these seven. So unless you think Gryffindor house alone accounts for more than half the Transfiguration NEWT class, it must number more than 12 students total. If you more reasonably assume that Gryffindor accounts for a quarter of this class then there are *at least* 28 students total. Not bad, Prof. McGonagall. What about the Charms NEWT class? Again, I count at least seven Gryffs in this class: the trio, Neville, Dean, Seamus and Lavender. And this is the subject taught by the *Ravenclaw* head of house. So unless the Gryffs dominate this class too it must total more students, probably *much* more, than the Potions NEWT class. Overall, I get the quite consistent impression that the average NEWT class numbers 25-28 students, and the potions class is unusually small. Neri From celizwh at intergate.com Fri May 26 00:22:25 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 00:22:25 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152906 Lanval: > Or from a simple, basic feeling of goodwill towards > others -- and likewise a reluctance to hurt others. > Anything wrong with that? houyhnhnm: I would certainly agree that anyone fitting that description is a good person. Who would you say fits that description in the Potterverse? Among the children, the only character who comes to my mind is Luna. There are others who are inoffensive, such as Ernie McMillan. But I wouldn't agree that mere inoffensiveness, while it may be nice, can be elevated to the level of good. Ernie may be good. We don't see enough of him to really know for sure. Among the adults, who qualifies for your definition of nice=good? On the other hand, the "nicest" person in the six books, and it is the kind of "nice" that causes people to recoil from the word, is Dolores Umbridge. She speaks with a "fluttery, girlish, high-pitched voice". She gives "silvery" laughs. She never barges into the conversation, but rather coughs delicately to signal her intention to speak ("/Hem, hem/") She is unfailingly polite and pleasant. She smiles and speaks sweetly, even when she is forcing Harry to carve sentences into the back of his own hand. (Was anyone else reminded of Kafka's "In the Penal Colony"?) I have no doubt she considers herself "nice". Lupin is also nice. His many sins of omission have been catalogued elsewhere so I won't go into them here. While he may turn out to be on the side of good, I have difficulty seeing him as an exemplar of goodness. So I guess I am trying to say that I agree that nice can equal good the way you define it, but I don't see too many characters in the Potterverse who meet the criteria. Maybe the argument could be made for Arthur Weasley. (Actually I think Harry manifests "a simple, basic feeling of goodwill towards others" fairly frequently, but I wouldn't describe him as "nice".) From maidne at yahoo.com Fri May 26 00:25:04 2006 From: maidne at yahoo.com (maidne) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 00:25:04 -0000 Subject: How to destroy a horcrux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152907 I just had an idea of Harry gathering up all of the horcruxes and chucking them one by one at a group of dementors. Sort of like throwing bread into a flock of seagulls. :p Of course you want to toss them from a fair distance. (This applies to both dementors and seagulls.) Susan From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 00:36:09 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 00:36:09 -0000 Subject: Who's to blame? (was Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152908 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > > a_svirn: > Oh? Then what's wrong with the Snape's comment? He stated that in his > considered opinion everyone (Neville included) could scrape a pass > grade. Surely a confidence boost of no common order. > Sigh. Except that he implied that Neville was a moron in the process, surely a most unprofessional and unforgiveably cruel thing to do. I actually do agree with you about McGonnagall. I think her behavior is extremely problematic to say the least. Not really my issue, but for what it's worth, I do agree. It would seem that we (most of us engaged in this particular subthread) are groping toward a surprising amount of consensus, considering that we are coming from very different directions. That is Hogwarts seems to be an astonishingly badly organized and poorly run school. Who's to blame for that? I suppose you could say wizarding society as a whole. Wizards do seem to be an incredibly stupid lot. But then we have an "epitome of goodness" as a headmaster. Not an unproblematic situation. There's also the problem that so many of the students are muggleborns and half-bloods, and logically they (and especially their parents) should be screaming bloody murder. It could also bespeak the fact that wizarding society is a lot worse off than it likes to admit -- especially in official statements and childrens' textbooks. JKR herself has implied that she considers wizards an "oppressed and threatened minority," or something to that effect. Am I the only one who finds the standard "we hide from muggles to keep from being bothered" line somewhat hard to swallow? It may well be that wizards are hiding because they are badly frightened and because the muggle witch hunts were a lot more effective than modern wizards want to let on. They are incredibly outnumbered, after all, and their society is riddled with elements (squibs, half bloods, and muggleborns) whose loyalties would be at the very least divided should a clash with most of humanity ever occur. And, as JKR said when she made the "oppressed minority" comment, the bad thing about most oppressed and frightened minorities is that they splinter and viciously turn on one another. Given that, wizards may simply not be able to afford anything better. Hogwarts teachers are pretty p**s poor at their jobs because the wizards don't have the money or other resources to train them properly, and they don't have the population density necessary to insure a supply of even barely talented educators. The recurrent problems filling the DADA job may have to do with the jinx rumor, but it probably also has to do with the fact that their just isn't a supply of even barely adequate candidates. It is interesting that the history position is filled by a ghost -- i.e. somebody who doesn't need the money. If there were a supply of adequate candidates for that job one would suspect having a ghost taking up the slot would be rather controversial. There didn't seem to be any belief that there would be many candidates for the divination job, either. Nor did anyone raise an eyebrow that Dumbledore had to "beg and wheedle" a retired potions professor to come back to work. It really seems like the WW has to strain its muscles to fill jobs that any mediocre muggle school can fill as a matter of course, even in an age when the vast majority of the population wouldn't even consider a teaching career. All in all it bespeaks a very poor society with extremely limited resources that lives in a perpetual state of fear and denial. Dumbledore said that the fountain the ministry was a lie. It may well be that most of what wizards tell themselves about their world, and the world in general, and the reasons that they hide, and the true extent of their power and resources, is a lie as well. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 01:09:37 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 01:09:37 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152909 > > Alla: > > > Okay, maybe it is not full blown compliment, but IMO it is a truthful > > assesment meaning to inspire such. > > a_svirn: > Oh? Then what's wrong with the Snape's comment? He stated that in his > considered opinion everyone (Neville included) could scrape a pass > grade. Surely a confidence boost of no common order. > Alla: Well, there is one thing which is certainly wrong with Snape comment in my opinion. Calling class moronic and then saying that they could scrape a pass grade does not exactly comparable in my book with saying that there is nothing wrong with your work except the lack of confidence. Look, I am honestly having trouble explaining why I accept Mcgonagall's words as positive and only positive. Maybe because when someone tells me that my work is good, it is just that I lack confidence, what I get from that saying is that my work is indeed GOOD, it is just my demeanor when I do it, needs to be more assertive, meaning that I CAN achieve results and am achieving it, it is just I need to put on better show for ourside world. Uh, you have to know me in RL to get what I am saying and I am just extrapolating that maybe Neville has the same reaction. But you are really arguing with me over semantics, I think. On the substantive level I completely agree with you. Mcgonagall treated Neville very badly, no question about it. The only reason why I stop short of calling it abuse is because in my opinion Mcgonagall would have done it to anybody who lost the passwords for example. She does not say at first that Neville you did it, she is asking who did it basically and then proceeds with her talk. I think she should not have done it, I think that she was VERY wrong, but do I think that she would have done it to ANY student? YES, and that I think what makes her better teacher then Sape among other things. But again, let me repeat, I think she mistreated Neville several times. Neri" wrote: > Overall, I get the quite consistent impression that the average NEWT > class numbers 25-28 students, and the potions class is unusually small. Alla: Oh, Neri Bravo. Your post goes into my "very favorite posts of all time" folder. Sounds like Snape indeed did not produce amasing NEWT results to me :-) JMO, Alla From lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk Thu May 25 18:32:12 2006 From: lunasaproject at yahoo.co.uk (Tara Tierney) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:32:12 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152910 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > Depends, I suppose, on whether you're willing to take people as they > are or whether you try to hold things up to some kind of abstract > standard. The fact is, IMO, people just aren't going to give mean > people a break. And it is not appropriate that mean people be given > a break. They have simply forfeited all claim to such things > through their behavior. And that's perfectly fair that things be > that way. There is a tendency for things to balance out in the > great scheme of things, and the harshness with which mean people are > judged is what they are due. > > Niceness, on the other hand, does get its reward in the great > balance wheel of things. And getting passes is part of it. So yes, > Hagrid gets a pass for his poor teaching. And Lupin gets a pass for > his problems. Snape, on the other hand, most certainly does NOT get > a pass for his abusive methods, no matter how effective they might > be. That's just the way the world is. And, in the great scheme of > things, it is perfectly fair and appropriate that it be so. > Lunasa: But Snape isn't that abusive, I mean, he favours his students! But all teachers do that! They know those kids in their house/form class better. That just can't be helped. And Snape isn't a bad teacher, the same cannot be said for Hagrid. Don't you think a stronger argument for Dumbledore condoning child abuse is hiring Hagrid, someone who never officially finished his magical training, some one who's not trained or equipped to be a teahcer, someone who's a not the most intelligent and someone who's not even meant to have a wand! Draco Malfoy was seriously injured in Hagrid's class. And you can't say that Hagrid doesn't have his prefereces. And I don't think Snape's even that abusive. I have a teacher just like him, except mines a bit of a pervert as well, but I wouldn't call him abusive. Snape's mean across the board. Even to HIS SLYTHERINS, at times, he just happens to be particularly mean to Harry and Neville. I mean, Harry is downright disrespectful at times, and Harry is the one who needs to learn an awful lot. And, Neville, well Neville wasn't even trying in Snapes class. No teacher would stand for that. And are we forgetting that we're getting our peeks at Snape's so-called abuse from a young boy? A young boy hwo is being targetted by this specific teacher? Don't you think that clouds things a little? And has Harry actually ever complained to Dumbledore specifically about Snape treatment? There aren't pictures in the Dungeons labs are there? Not many kids are willing to go straight to the headmaster, or even there form teacher or head of year about a way a teacher treats them. They expect the school to take the teachers side, I know when I told my mum about one of my primary school teachers hitting me with some counting bricks they did take her side, simply because she denied it. And can you see Harry walking up to Petunia Dursley and having a heart to heart with her becasue one of his teachers is picking on him? No. Lunasa From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri May 26 01:38:28 2006 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:38:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Predictions about book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060526013828.38194.qmail@web53301.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152911 Eggplant wrote: I'm going to make some predictions about book 7, I do this for the joy it will give others when it turns out that every one of them is wrong. Well, for whatever it's worth: snip< Luckdragon now: I love predictions! Are comments welcome? If not ignore the following: 1)Book 7 will be published on July 13 2007, the same day as the next movie. LD: I think my head would explode! This cannot and must not happen. I need at least one week of just the book to savour every last word. i'm still voting for the 7th or 31st. 2)JKR will abandon the "and the" convention for the title of book 7 to signify that it's different from the other 6; so the last Harry Potter book ever written will be called "Harry Potter The Chosen One". LD: Very possible, but dissappointing. 3)In these dangerous times Ron and Hermione will decide it's now or never, so the wedding that we all know will lead off the book will become a double wedding; it might even become a triple but probably not. LD: That would be fun; but I would worry LV would use one to get at the other. 4)RAB is Regulus Aldebaran Black. (Aldebaran means "the follower") LD: ...but he turned against LV in the end. I'm guessing Allard(noble & brave), because he had the courage to turn against LV knowing he would be killed. 5)Snape loved Lilly Potter and that's the reason he hates Harry not because he looks like James, Snape blames Harry for Lilly's death. LD: possibly, but I think it's more a jealousy thing. 6)Dumbledore trusted Snape because he detected sincere grief from him when he heard the Potters were murdered, and because 16 years ago Snape made an unbreakable vow to protect the life of their only child. LD: I agree mostly, but I think the UV was with DD. 7)There is room in the book for only one bad guy to get redeemed and that spot will fall to Draco. LD: Agreed 8)Percy will betray Harry to the Death Eaters and will meet justice for this foul deed by a member of his own family. LD: The Weasleys are too compassionate to kill Percy. I think Percy will realize the errors of his ways and eventually rejoin the family. 9)Harry's Patronus will change from a stag to a phoenix, probably near the end of the book. LD: Agreed 10)Voldemort will definitely not win of course, but people will be debating for a long time if Harry was really victorious and if the price he paid was too high. LD: Agree Harry will win. 11)The last chapter before the epilogue will be called "The Next Great Adventure" or "The Man Who Died". LD: How about " It was all a dream". I like "The man who died" if it refers to LV. 12)Neville will survive and become the Herbology Professor at Hogwarts and eventually Headmaster. LD: I'm betting on a medical career for Neville. 13)Ron and Hermione will also survive, and they will name their first child "Harry". LD: Too Cheesy! If they reproduce I'm betting on a girl with an Arthurian name. That was fun! --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail - --------------------------------- Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Fri May 26 01:47:37 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 01:47:37 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152912 Neri: > So is it because the other students had their books > and ingredients ready? But maybe they simply got > previous information that the standards were lowered > this year. I'd expect critical information such as the > minimal grade required for each NEWT class to be > available for students earlier than their first day > of school. It would be just like Ron to neglect checking > for any updates, and Harry of course wouldn't know about > it at all. houyhnhnm: That is very unlikely. ******************** Dumbledore cleared his throat. Harry, Ron, and Hermione were not the only ones who had been talking: the whole Hall had erupted in a buzz of conversation at the news that Snape had finally achieved his heart's desire. Seemingly oblivious to the sensational nature of the news he had just imparted, Dumbledore said nothing more about staff appointments, but waited a few seconds to ensure that the silence was absolute before continuing. (HBP8) ******************** The evidence is very much on the side of the other ten NEWT Potions students having come to Hogwarts prepared to enroll in Potions because they had achieved the necessary score on their OWL. So ten out of 40 students in Harry's year got the highest possible score on their Potions OWL. Make it 50 if you like. That's still 20% who got the the WW equivalent of an "A". That's about three times as many as I'm getting ready to give out in a couple of weeks. (And I'm a softie.) From belviso at attglobal.net Fri May 26 01:48:56 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:48:56 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) References: Message-ID: <007101c68066$95253160$216c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 152913 > Neri: Overall, I get the quite consistent impression that the average NEWT class numbers 25-28 students, and the potions class is unusually small. Magpie: The Potions class is forshadowed as being small and exclusive back in OotP when McGonagall says Snape only accepts O students. Not to speak for Betsy, but I don't think her premise is that Snape's the best teacher, but that he seems to have gotten a good percentage of O's, which are hard to get, and what he was going for (I have to think of the class as having 40 students because whatever JKR says, everything in the book says 40, the same number of kids she created in her head). I think Harry and Ron being the only kids not having books is good evidence that they are the only ones who did not get O's. I see no reason to assume some secret message other kids were getting that they didn't, since not only is there no reason to think that Harry and Ron would no know about or check this information (or Herimone would) it's not mentioned in canon. Harry gets early information on Slughorn and even he learns that he's the Potions master the same time as everyone else. McGonagall is giving the Trio and Neville information on what they need to get into classes when they sign up--again no reference to things they could have looked up earlier. Betsy's premise, which one may or may not agree with, is based on the idea that McGonagall describes Snape's class as being difficult to get into because he only accepts O's. Harry and Ron to get plenty of E's, and Harry gets only one O--even Hermione somehow manages to get an E in DADA, something that to me is harder to believe than Ernie Macmillan getting an O in Potions. I see no reason to think that his performance in Slughorn's class means he couldn't have gotten an O, and Hermione's behavior in class doesn't say to me she must be the only one with an O on her OWL. So again back to Betsy's premise, she's saying (I think) that if Snape's produced at least ten OWLS that's fine. (He may have produced more who didn't continue with Potions.) McGonagall's class and NEWT DADA accept EEs, so twice as many students isn't very remarkable (that only Harry and Ron decide to take Potions once the requirements are reduced could mean Snape wasn't a reason for people not to take the class, or I suppose he could have made a lot of people hate the subject itself). The DA may have given more kids an interest in DADA and the desire to continue--though I'd say given the state of the world DADA was of course going to be big. As for the other classes, I guess we don't really know. 7 Gryffindors and 1 Slytherin at least in Transfig, which means they got EEs. 25 EEs or up in DADA (had it required an O Hermione wouldn't have made it!). There's no reason to assume that Gryffindor accounts for a quarter of the class literally. Same with charms. Qualifying for a class doesn't mean one will take it. Certain subjects are probably more basic and have more students--I'd guess Charms is probably one of them. For my own perspective, it's this: Oh dear, maths. I don't think JKR has thought about literally how many students were in each class to give us hints about how to rank the teachers, but just a basic idea and who she wanted in the class. I think all the teachers did fine, and that we know McGonagall and Snape are both demanding--business as usual. JKR's not so subtle, imo, that we'd need to infer something important about Snape as a teacher by comparing how many kids we think are in Potions to the number of kids are in the potentially much sexier and self-defense-teaching DADA. If the Potions class was supposed to be small for some reason that really reflected on Snape, I think we'd hear it. That's something that interests Harry. I think it's more that since we're going to spend a lot of time in that class, she keeps the number controlled, while DADA naturally needs to be large because hello, Voldemort! The other classes don't really matter about size. -m From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 02:01:23 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 02:01:23 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152914 > >>Neri: > Why do you assume that ten students in the NEWT potions class > achieved "Outstanding"? Do you think that everybody except Harry > and Ron got an Outstanding? I doubt this is the case. > Betsy Hp: Basically then, you're arguing that all the other students in Harry's class know more about what's going on at Hogwarts than Harry does. With his strong, personal ties with Dumbledore. That everyone else in Harry's class got a little note explaining that NEWT Potions is now excepting "Exceeds Expectations". Perhaps McGonagall just failed to inform her Gryffindors while sending notes out to all the other students? It seems like an illogical set of conclusions to me. There's a sweet simplicity in just accepting the fact that only Harry and Ron do not have Potions textbooks, so therefore only Harry and Ron failed to make an Outstanding on their Potions' OWL. > >>Neri: > In fact, Hermione was obviously doing better than anybody else in > the class (except for Harry, who had an unfair advantage) during > the whole year, so it would be strange if all of them had > an "Outstanding" like she had. Judging from Ernie's performances I > doubt very much he got an Outstanding OWL. > Betsy Hp: Or (and again, more likely) Hermione is the cleverest witch of her age, and Slughorn isn't Snape. > >>Neri: > Also, are ten students a quarter? JKR didn't say there are 40 > students in Harry's year. She recently explained that she had > created 40 students with background, but she had never decided > they are the only students in Harry's year. Betsy Hp: Actually, I think there's probably less than 40 students in Harry's year. There are only 8 Gryffindor's in his class (there's absolutely no way Harry hasn't met two girls in his house and in his year). There's never been a sense that Gryffindor is vastly outnumbered by Slytherins in classes they share. Nor do they appear to be vastly outnumbered by the Hufflepuffs they share classes with. Similarly there's no mention of overwhelming Ravenclaws. So, IMO, and there's no canon to suggest otherwise, approximately 10 students in each house of Harry's year makes sense, and fits canon. > >>Neri: > And then she repeated the number of 600 students for the whole > school. Betsy Hp: Which would average out to approximately 86 students in each year. Which is totally unsupported by canon for Harry's class. Again, there's nothing pointing to an unusually small Gryffindor for Harry's year. Of course, Harry's class could easily be an unusually small group, since they were all born when Voldemort appeared to be winning the war. While a couple of classes below Harry there could easily have been a WW baby boom. So again, a class of approximately 40 students in Harry's year makes the most sense. > >>Neri: > So what we know for certain is that Snape produced 12 NEWT students > who got EE or higher and wanted to continue with the subject. Betsy Hp: No, what we know for certain is that only Harry and Ron got Exceeds Expectations. As everyone else had the proper supplies, everyone else in the class received an Outstanding. > >>Neri: > But is this number high, low or average? The only way to know > would be to compare it with the number of students in other NEWT > classes. DADA, for example. > Betsy Hp: It'd be helpful if we knew what sort of requirement NEWT level DADA made. We know it's not as stringent as Potions, otherwise Ron and Hermione wouldn't be in there. > >>Neri: > There are 25 students in this class. It looks like five different > DADA teachers, three of them hopeless, produced more than *twice* > the number of NEWT students that Snape produced during these same > years. > Betsy Hp: If Snape was as picky about his DADA students as he was about his Potions students, I think we'd probably have a class of one. Though a few Ravenclaws may have squeaked on through. So, we can't really compare DADA to Potions. Potions is more elite. At least when Snape was teaching it. > >>Neri: > Now, what about the Transfiguration NEWT class? I can't find how > many students it contains, but I do count at least seven > Gryffindors who are canonically in it: the trio, Dean, Seamus, > Lavender and Parvati. > > If you more reasonably assume that Gryffindor accounts for a > quarter of this class then there are *at least* 28 students total. > Not bad, Prof. McGonagall. Betsy Hp: Not bad. Of course, Prof. McGonagall accepts Exceeds Expectations. Prof. Snape did not. So again, Potions is more elite than Transfiguration, and again, to make a fair comparison we need to know how many of her students pulled an Outstanding. (I'd bet McGonagall and Snape are about even on that score.) > >>Neri: > What about the Charms NEWT class? > Betsy Hp: Again, Flitwick takes Exceeds Expectations. So again, this isn't a valid comparison unless you can show how many students pulled an Outstanding. (Though again, I'd bet Flitwick and Snape are even.) > >>Neri: > Overall, I get the quite consistent impression that the average > NEWT class numbers 25-28 students, and the potions class is > unusually small. Betsy Hp: Of course it is. It's the most elite NEWT course that we've seen. Snape has the highest grade requirement that we've seen. But to have that sort of expectation and to have a quarter of his students meet that expectation speaks well of Prof. Snape. And thats assuming that every single student that pulled an Outstanding on their OWL *wanted* to go for their NEWT. Betsy Hp From drednort at alphalink.com.au Fri May 26 02:05:32 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:05:32 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who's to blame? (was Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4476EF0C.19148.42C295B@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152915 On 26 May 2006 at 0:36, lupinlore wrote: > It would seem that we (most of us engaged in this particular subthread) > are groping toward a surprising amount of consensus, considering that > we are coming from very different directions. That is Hogwarts seems > to be an astonishingly badly organized and poorly run school. Shaun: I'm not sure I agree with that. The school certainly seems to have some problems, but I think it's hard to say precisely how bad things are. We only get a fairly narrow view of what the school is like. In my view, it could have very serious problems. Or they could be quite minor - I just can't tell. But we also need to remember that the way we judge a school depends on lot on where we are coming from. As I've made clear in the past, I think Hogwarts is very heavily based on the traditional British Public School model - http://home.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/HSWW.html Now, I happen to think that is a very good model for a school in its essence (there can certainly be problems in individual cases, and there are historical aspects that needed to be changed - but overall I do think it's a good model). But there's plenty of people out there with differing opinions. What makes a school a good school or a bad school, or a type of school a good type or a bad type is a very contentious issue. In fairness, in my view, Hogwarts should be judged in comparison to the type of school it is modelled on. Attempting to judge it in comparison to, say, an American High School, or a British Comprehensive, or an Australian Secondary College just doesn't produce a fair judgement of Hogwarts as a school in my view. And when you compare Hogwarts to the schools I believe it is modelled on, it's not that unusual. I don't think it's unusually bad. Or unusually good. From the limited information we have I think it's old fashioned (even for such schools - it seems to have a late Victorian/ Edwardian feel in my view as opposed to more modern developments) good in some aspects, bad in some aspects. It has some problems - but I'm not sure I could agree it is badly organised or badly run. It might be. I'd need to see why others think it is to see if I agreed. lupinlore: > Who's to blame for that? I suppose you could say wizarding society as > a whole. Wizards do seem to be an incredibly stupid lot. But then we > have an "epitome of goodness" as a headmaster. Not an unproblematic > situation. There's also the problem that so many of the students are > muggleborns and half-bloods, and logically they (and especially their > parents) should be screaming bloody murder. Shaun: I don't follow your last point - could you enlarge on it perhaps? I also don't think wizards are stupid. The fact that they may have a different society than us doesn't make them stupid. Cultural imperialism may be attractive to some people, but imposing our view of society on another culture is already problematic. I do agree that if Hogwarts has serious problems, part of those problems may come from the reverance in which Dumbledore is held. It's much harder to advocate change in a school where the Headmaster is a very revered figure - I know of some historical examples of exactly that happening. But the issue I don't understand is why you think muggleborns and half-blood parents should be screaming 'bloody murder.' There's plenty of muggles around - including quite a number on this list - who may not see anything inherently wrong with Hogwarts, whether it is wrong or right. Some parents pay an absolute fortune to send their children to schools that, in my view, are very bad schools. But that's what they want for their kids. My parents paid a fortune to send me to a school I loved - but many people would have hated. It's an individual choice. There's no 'muggle view' that's universal. Maybe there are some muggles or half-bloods who have refused to let their children go to Hogwarts because they dislike the idea of the place so much. If so, we wouldn't see those kids in the school. Also, muggle parents may have absolutely no idea of what the school is actually like. In my view, the average Muggle parent who is sending their child to Hogwarts, probably envisages it very much as being a British Public School. And those schools are *overall* by *most people* are seen as being very good schools (whether they deserve that reputation or not). Especially, if as many people believe, Hogwarts is free for its students to attend, there might be a lot of muggle parents out there who are delighted that their child has a free place at such a school. And that's before you consider the fact that muggle parents are having to deal with children who have powers and abilities they can't even begin to understand. Discovering there's a school - one school - which will help your child deal with issues you can't grasp - that's a pretty powerful incentive to both send your child there, and not to rock the boat. I see that with some parents of some very gifted children I know. And my own parents wound up choosing an education for me that was totally different to anything they had planned for or anticipated because experts told them that was where I needed to be. And they weren't always delighted with things they knew were happening there - but it was hard to find any other choice. lupinlore: > Given that, wizards may simply not be able to afford anything better. > Hogwarts teachers are pretty p**s poor at their jobs because the > wizards don't have the money or other resources to train them properly, > and they don't have the population density necessary to insure a supply > of even barely talented educators. The recurrent problems filling the > DADA job may have to do with the jinx rumor, but it probably also has > to do with the fact that their just isn't a supply of even barely > adequate candidates. Shaun: Historically teachers at schools like Hogwarts weren't actually trained as teachers. It wasn't considered necessary. And many of these people were excellent teachers despite that fact. Teacher training (and I've spent the last three and a half years going through it) really doesn't teach you all that much in my experience. I've learned a lot of political theory, but very little practical skills - those have been developed by learning on the job during my teaching practice. And what little I have learned in my classes at Uni, has mostly come only in the last twelve weeks - when I'm already considered to be a very competent teacher. A lot depends on what you are looking for in your teachers. If you want teachers who embrace certain theories (often politically correct theories) on education, teacher training is great. If you want teachers who can just impart knowledge and skills to the students, it may not be necessary. I think formal teacher training can be valuable in turning a mediocre teacher into a competent one, personally. But I don't think it does that much for those who are already competent to begin with. And I think the teachers at Hogwarts vary widely in their abilities. Some are good teachers (in my view). Some are bad (in my view). Most seem at least competent. I do think you are on to something when you talk about the population issue, and I do think it's a facotr. When there's only one school with (normally) only one teacher in each subject, so the only way you are going to get a job is if you happen to be lucky enough to apply at the right time - not many people are going to consider teaching as a career. Especially not when - as Professor Dippet shows in his interview with Tom Riddle - that this is not a job you can get straight out of school. So you really have to plan for another career and people just fall into teaching at some point. There's also the factor to consider though that in the years after a war, even in our society, schools have often found it very hard to find teachers. Much harder than normal. You lose people in a war, and people need to replace them. Unfortunately teaching is one of the areas that often finds itself unable to find the people it needs. And when it comes to a subject like DADA - well, it seems to me that experts on defending against the Dark Arts are a group you would have expected to have been heavily involved in a war, and to have therefore suffered high casualties and therefore to be in greater demand than ever in the years after that war. lupinlore: > It is interesting that the history position is filled by a ghost -- > i.e. somebody who doesn't need the money. If there were a supply of > adequate candidates for that job one would suspect having a ghost > taking up the slot would be rather controversial. There didn't seem to > be any belief that there would be many candidates for the divination > job, either. Nor did anyone raise an eyebrow that Dumbledore had > to "beg and wheedle" a retired potions professor to come back to work. > It really seems like the WW has to strain its muscles to fill jobs that > any mediocre muggle school can fill as a matter of course, even in an > age when the vast majority of the population wouldn't even consider a > teaching career. All in all it bespeaks a very poor society with > extremely limited resources that lives in a perpetual state of fear and > denial. Dumbledore said that the fountain the ministry was a lie. It > may well be that most of what wizards tell themselves about their > world, and the world in general, and the reasons that they hide, and > the true extent of their power and resources, is a lie as well. Shaun: A poor society - yes, but not necessarily one that is poor in money and resources. It may be a society that is poor in *people*. It has less *people* than it should. Given it's recent history, that would be my first impression as to the most likely shortage in the Wizarding World. As for Divination - it seems that it's not a job that just anyone can do. Seers are rare. And because of their rarity probably have better jobs available to them than teaching. Hogwarts has a Divination teacher who is a Seer - but not a very good one. That may be the only type of seer that goes around seeking a teaching job. 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 kjones at telus.net Fri May 26 02:07:21 2006 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:07:21 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Predictions about book 7 In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605251557o5117790bn782c63e858950e83@mail.gmail.com> References: <1789c2360605251557o5117790bn782c63e858950e83@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <447662D9.8050303@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152916 Peggy Wilkins wrote: > Peggy W: > I like Alla's 07/07/07 for it's numeric coolness, but personally I'm > hoping for 7/25/07 just because it's my birthday. Well at least I get > the HBP paperback this year. :) KJ writes: I'm going to vote for July 31, Harry's birthday, because that would have the most significance for the final book. > Peggy W: > My bet is on Peter Pettigrew as Lily-lover, because it seems to answer > quite a few nagging questions. Peter could have asked Lily be spared > in exchange for revealing the Potters' location to Voldemort; he could > have quickly told Dumbledore what happened as part of the plan to save > himself, right before running off to frame Sirius, which answers the > question of how word got out so quickly. It also seems consistent > with his personality. KJ: I'm not a Snape/Lily fan. I tend to think that Snape was working for Dumbledore prior to the prophesy, that DD told him what to tell Voldemort, and that Snape was angry and remorseful that this caused the deaths of the Potters. I also think that Snape did not approve of Harry's freedom to get into trouble, the luring of Voldemort to Hogwarts to steal the stone, the hiring of Lupin to also perhaps aid in luring Black to Hogwarts, and allowing Harry to participate in the TWT. I think that part of the purpose of the Tower scene is to demonstrate the fact that there is no limit to what Snape will do in obedience to Dumbledore's orders, whether he approves of them or not. > Peggy W: > Personally I don't think simple remorse is enough reason for > Dumbledore to trust Snape, I think there must be a more concrete > reason for that. I say "more concrete" because Snape could simply be > telling a tale of remorse--I see that as a cover story, the story he > tells Bella at Spinners End. KJ: I agree in that there is some hidden reason why DD trusts Snape. He is too sure of it and tolerates no argument about it, but neither will he explain it. > > Eggplant: > > 9)Harry's Patronus will change from a stag to a phoenix, probably near > > the end of the book. > > Peggy W: > I disagree with this prediction, only because it would seem to > represent abandoning his father and family ties, which I don't think > Harry would want to do. KJ: I also disagree but on the grounds that it will only further the plot if it turns out that Snape's patronus changes to a phoenix. This is really the only thing that will allow him to contact the Order and be believed. Harry's patronus changing to a phoenix would only underscore what we already know, that Harry feels DD's loss deeply. Eggplant: > Voldemort will definitely not win of course, but people will be > debating for a long time if Harry was really victorious and if the > price he paid was too high. KJ: I think this is very true, particularly if my prediction is true and Harry gives up his life in the cause to destroy the final piece of soul. I can picture a heart-rending scene where his mother, father, Sirius, Dumbledore, probably Lupin, and Ginny are all waiting to welcome him home. Pretty sure Voldemort won't be going there! I also think that Snape will not survive. I suspect that his sole purpose is to see the end of Voldemort, no matter what he has to do to achieve it. He will throw himself in front of Harry shielding him from the killing curse and drop his wand at Harry's feet so that Harry has a wand that will work against Voldemort's wand. This is why it was so important to place Snape at Voldemort's side when Harry finally comes before him, and why Ollivander was hidden away where Voldemort could not find him to change wands. I bet! KJ From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri May 26 02:53:21 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 02:53:21 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152917 > houyhnhnm: > > That is very unlikely. > > ******************** > Dumbledore cleared his throat. Harry, Ron, and Hermione were not the > only ones who had been talking: the whole Hall had erupted in a buzz > of conversation at the news that Snape had finally achieved his > heart's desire. Seemingly oblivious to the sensational nature of the > news he had just imparted, Dumbledore said nothing more about staff > appointments, but waited a few seconds to ensure that the silence was > absolute before continuing. (HBP8) > ******************** > > The evidence is very much on the side of the other ten NEWT Potions > students having come to Hogwarts prepared to enroll in Potions because > they had achieved the necessary score on their OWL. > Neri: Oh, I quite agree that the students didn't know that Snape is going to be the DADA teacher. However, knowing that the required grade was lowered is a completely different matter. Which NEWTs to take is a major decision with critical implications for the career of young wizards. Most of them probably discuss it with their parents (or more likely, their parents discuss it with them) and for that they need to know the true and updated requirements *before* the students leave for Hogwarts. There were several weeks before Sept 1st for this update to be published, for example in the Daily Prophet, or maybe added to the list of textbooks of the sixth years. In contrast the identity of the teacher is theoretically not supposed to be a factor in this decision (although in practice it probably is sometimes) and therefore it doesn't have to be published in advance. If you think the rest of the students didn't know in advance about changing the required grade, how come there weren't additional EE students with no books and ingredients, quickly jumping on this opportunity to get into an important class? Especially when the new teacher doesn't make a secret of his influence in important places, nor his habit to help his students get there. And you still have to explain why Hermione, the only confirmed Outstanding in the class, was indeed considerably better than the rest. This is also the impression I get from the text when the trio first enters the class: *************************************************************** HBP, Ch. 9: When they arrived in the corridor they saw that there were only a dozen people progressing to N.E.W.T. level. Crabbe and Goyle had evidently failed to achieve the required O.W.L. grade, but four Slytherins had made it through, including Malfoy. *************************************************************** "Only a dozen" sounds like the class was unexpectedly small. "evidently failed to achieve the required O.W.L. grade" clearly means EE, which the reader and Harry already know to be the required grade. "but four Slytherins had made it through" doesn't sound like they all got Outstanding. It sounds as if (unlike Crabbe and Goyle) they made it through over the required grade. Neri From okbkenan007 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 02:20:25 2006 From: okbkenan007 at yahoo.com (Oded, Kerstin and Billy Kenan) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: sexy Snape? JKRs men Message-ID: <20060526022025.60941.qmail@web31910.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152918 Najwa said I really don't think up until now I can say that anyone of JKR's men would suit my tastes, but to be quite honest I'd probably say the person who came closest to it would be Dumbledore. He has an odd sense of humor, he was very intelligent, and even though I'm not into beards or long hair I would have probably not cared because of all of the other characteristics that he has. The age gap is huge though, so that would be an issue. Kerstin: I think Dumbledore would be perfect as a grandfather or mentor to learn from and study with, more like a "dictionary in human form". As a boyfriend, apart from the age difference he is far too wise and too powerful a wizard. He'd make me feel inadequate all the time, even if he isn't the person to show off his knowledge. Najwa: I do find Snape attractive, but I suppose that is due to the gothic look that Alan Rickman pulled off quite nicely, and I do adore Alan Rickman, so perhaps I'm attracted to the movie Snape, and not the drawings in the book. Kerstin: I have to admit that I did not have a clear mental picture of his looks before I saw the film, so to me he looks like Alan Rickman,too. But he just gives me the creeps when every time he appears in the books. He's like a person that makes a room feel 10 degrees colder when he enters it,IMO. Kerstin (who apologises, because probably you guys have discussed all this before so I'll get back to reading the archives so I'll be up to date in future) From empress.najwa at gmail.com Thu May 25 21:56:29 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:56:29 -0000 Subject: Predictions about book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152919 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: < SNIP of the predictions, go UPTHREAD to read them> Najwa: Those points are quite interesting and I hope that some of them are true. I do like the Red Hen's Revised Changling Hypothesis, as much as I loved the original. I felt that there was something going along those lines from this scene in OOtP: pg. 468 US edition, chapter 22 "You misunderstand me," said Dumbledore, still in the same calm tone. "I mean...can you remember--- er---where you were positioned as you watched this attack happen? Were you perhaps standing beside the victim, or else looking down on the scene from above?" This was such a curious question that Harry gaped at Dumbledore; it was almost as if he knew... Najwa again. Some may argue that Dumbledore knew because of Legilimensy, however I think it's more that he had a clue of the "connection". OOtP again: pg. 470 The instrument tinkled into life at once with rhythmic clinking noises. Tiny puffs of pale green smoke became a steady stream of smoke that thickened and coiled in the air...A serpent's head drew out of the end of it, opening its mouth wide. Harry wondered whether the instrument was confirming his story: He looked eagerly at Dumbledore for a sign that he was right, but Dumbledore did not look up. "Naturally, naturally," murmured Dumbledore apparently to himself, still observing the stream of smoke without the slightest sign of surprise. "But in essence divided?" Harry could not make heads or tails of this question. The smoke serpent however, split iitself instantly into two snakes, both coiling and undulating in the dark air. With a look of grim satisfaction Dumbledore gave the instrument another gentle tap with his wand: -- All of this had always had me wondering, because he did not ask the 'usual' questions that someone would ask when being approached with this sort of issue. I emailed the Red hen with this and this was her response: Red Hen: It is very interesting that you should have brought that scene up. We've been discussing it this week - at least briefly - over on one of the boards that I look in on regularly. I hadn't really given it a lot of consideration, previously. It occured to one of the partcipants that this may be where the suggestion that Nagini is the 6th Horcrux came from. Dumbledore knew that Tom was involved in the attack. A snake doesn't just randomly get into the DoM and go looking for someone to bite. And Harry wouldn't have been linked into it if Tom wasn't involved, since his connection is to Tom. So as soon as Harry reported a snake attack he knew that whatever his instrument showed it would probably be represented by a snake. That was no surprise. Nor was it a surprise when the smokey snake split into two. It didn't, however, split into three. There was a physical snake, and there was Tom. Harry ought to have been represented as well. (It is possible that the instrument *was* really representing only Harry and Tom and ignoring Nagini.) Well the big news at the conclusion of OotP is that Albus Dumbledore makes emotional mistakes. He also has repeatedly demonstrated his conviction that other people cannot handle the truth. I think that perhaps he isn't quite as good at that himself as he needs to be. Despite the fact that he has been dancing around the issue of the significance of Harry's scar and the nature of his connection to Lord Voldemort ever since the opening of the series, the fact that he came out with the suggestion that Nagini may be the 6th Horcrux was an even bigger suggestion that he may have led himself up the garden path. After all, he would hardly *want* to have to grapple with the problem of Harry being the 6th Horcrux, which will *also* have to be destroyed in order to get rid of their enemy. And, once examined, there *are* a lot of oddities concerning Lord Voldemort's dealings with that snake. So the suggestion *didn't* just come out of nowhere, even though one certainly gets that impression when he pops out with it. And Harry may remember the image of the smokey snake splitting into two snakes eventually, and interpret it differently from the way Albus did. Najwa's response to that: The splitting into two perhaps signified Harry and Tom, or Tom and Nigini, but what we don't know is what Dumbledore asked the instrument. He could have asked it why is Harry dreaming that he bit Arthur Weasley? That was my take on it. Now if Harry was a Horcrux, he would have to destroy all the other horcruxes and the walking talking new Voldie. I think this will lead to a scene when, after all the horcruxes were destroyed, Harry will finally face Voldemort and destroy him. A few minutes of celebration and triumph will follow, until the Voldie horcrux stuck in the Scar will begin to retaliate and laugh in Harry's face and begin an internal battle. The red hen suggests that since it is but a mere memory of Tom riddle stuck in him, that perhaps it can be obliviated. I am not sure if that is the case, or if I totally agree to that one, but I do like the idea. My thought on this is that either Harry will have to walk through the veil, and since he is carrying two souls inside of him, he might be able to battle it in the land of death behind the veil, see some lost loved ones and get to get some closure and perhaps they might be able to help, including Merope subduing her own monsterous son, and finally walk back out triumphant, as well as scarless. He might get stuck there as well. It's a toss up, but I hope for the prior to happen. That's what runs through my mind when I think of "The final battle". Najwa From wdcaroline at yahoo.ca Thu May 25 19:03:25 2006 From: wdcaroline at yahoo.ca (Wade Caroline) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:03:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Book 7 Predictions and Harry's Fate (again) Message-ID: <20060525190325.90114.qmail@web61219.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152920 Eggplant wrote: > 11The last chapter before the epilogue will be called The Next Great > Adventure or The Man Who Died. Alla wrote: > Possibly, but I am hoping it will be called The man who lived again. > Harry will "die" somehow, but will experience symbolic resurrection So dumbledore are you saying Harry will die? Contrary to a well argued opinion presented here earlier this week that he won 't, I must agree with you. Sadly. What is a symbolic resurrection? wade From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Fri May 26 03:29:12 2006 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 03:29:12 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?FILK:_Longbottom=92s_Pet_Toad?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152921 Longbottom's Pet Toad To the tune of The Long and Winding Road by the Beatles MIDI at: http://www.danapannell.com/beatles/longroad.htm Trevor the Toad, in his "ribbeting" solo debut! TREVOR: I'm Longbottom's pet toad who leaps out the door, I'm apt to disappear When in the mood to tour, or hopping far and near, New roads I explore My weak and wimpy friend I will not obey, He's full of doubt and fear ev'ry time I stray Watch Neville searching here, bet he'll look all day. Many times I've been lost and ev'ry time I'm found Anyway I'll never go unless I can rebound, but Still I'll always say that, "I'm Longbottom's toad, Who kept me close at hand, though toads were too uncool. I'm his amphibian, now and evermore." - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm (updated today with 68 new filks) From ldorman at researchbydesign.com Thu May 25 23:49:24 2006 From: ldorman at researchbydesign.com (kibakianakaya) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 23:49:24 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152922 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > To me, this would seem to be something worse than death, > > On the subject of the prophecy - yet again! > > I do not think that one of the two dying is absolutely > necessary because the prophecy - like the Delphic utterances - is > vague. > > The phrase over which so much bandwidth has been used in the last > couple of years or so says... > "...and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can > live while > the other survives..." > > but... > > What are Voldemort and Harry both doing at the moment and have been > since Sybill said her piece some fifteen years before? > > Both are alive and surviving. > > So. What will cause the prophecy to become true? At the moment it hasn't > been fuflilled and its requirements are being shown to be wrong day by day. > Is it referring to some unspecified future date? > > Something akin to Morgoth's fate overtaking Voldemort would get Harry off > the hook of becoming a murderer. Short of this, there must be fates worse > than death which could rise up to frighten Voldemort - a Dementor's kiss > maybe? Or would there be spells a strong as those surrounding Morgoth > to keep Tom well and truly under wraps for good? > Lilygale here: The word "live" has connotations of living life to its fullest. For example, we say "she is living it up" or "he's really living" to imply fun, fulfillment, positive aspects of life that go beyond mere existance. These added meanings make sense in the context of the prophecy. I think that Jo may have had something like this in mind when she wrote the prophecy. "For neither can - 'find their full potential, lead a fulfilling, satisfying, whole existance' while the other survives. >From Harry's point of view, his entire existance has been shaped around the threat from LV. What are Harry's true desires? What would really make him happy, content, whole? What would allow him to fulfill his great potential as a truly good and pure human being? Whatever the answer to these questions, Harry will not be able to find out until LV is vanquished, i.e. out of his life for good. Lilygale, who finds herself disappointed that the last book may come out next year because this speculation is just so much fun. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Fri May 26 03:31:39 2006 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 03:31:39 -0000 Subject: Book 7 Predictions and Harry's Fate (again) In-Reply-To: <20060525190325.90114.qmail@web61219.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152923 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Wade Caroline wrote: > > Eggplant wrote: > > 11The last chapter before the epilogue will be called The Next Great > > Adventure or The Man Who Died. Right, and the 7th Book itself will be titled Harry Potter and the Mega- Spoiler. - CMC From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 26 03:50:27 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 03:50:27 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes - Power- and Tiara Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152924 Still pondering Horcruxes. I think that it is important in general or to LV that the object has some power within it. Also I think that the person selected for the murder is important for a number of reasons. It is possible that they need to have a strong life force and it probably helps if they are a person of considerable personal power. I think this would be important to help both sustain LV's soul piece in the object and perhaps to give the piece that is still in his body added power. What do people think of this idea? And I still want to know "Who" did he kill for each horcrux? Also did anyone notice the reference to a tiara twice in HBP? Molly is going to give one to Fleur to wear at the wedding and there is an old one in the Room of Requirement. Wonder if it could be a horcrux? I don't like the fact that there are two of them and in a sort of throw-away line kind of way that would lead any Auror to wonder.. I hope that the tiara is just a tiara and not a murder weapon.. I don't really care all that much for Fleur, but I would not want to see Bill hurt anymore that he already has been. And I don't want to see Molly killed either! Tonks_op From keithooh1984 at time.net.my Fri May 26 00:44:27 2006 From: keithooh1984 at time.net.my (Keith Ooh ) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 08:44:27 +0800 Subject: How to destroy a horcrux Message-ID: <90645327.53279064@time.net.my> No: HPFGUIDX 152925 Susan wrote: > I just had an idea of Harry gathering up all of the horcruxes and > chucking them one by one at a group of dementors. Sort of like > throwing bread into a flock of seagulls. :p Of course you want > to > toss them from a fair distance. (This applies to both dementors > and > seagulls.) I don't think so... The soul in the horcrux is destroyed first. Like what Harry did in the Second book... Harry used the snake's fang to destroy the horcrux. I guess he will find the horcrux first before destroying it, and take it with him when he defeats "You Know Who" tzenipie From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri May 26 04:41:39 2006 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 04:41:39 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152926 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Leslie41: > Oh, I'm not talking about what he thinks about Sirius Black, which > is, I would point out, what nearly everyone else in the wizarding > world thinks about Sirius Black as well. Snape's not angry because > he thinks Sirius is guilty. That's only part of it. Go back and > look look at "Owl Post Again." > > Snape is furious because he believes that Harry has helped Sirius > escape. That's a very nice dodge, but it absolutely does not deal with Snape's hissy fit *in the Shack proper*, which escalates into CAPSLOCK!Snape at one point--and *that* hissy fit is over Hermione's suggestion that Snape doesn't know everything that's going on here and he should maybe possibly do Sirius and Lupin the courtesy of listening to their story. That suggestion is what precipitates the explosion. He's angry in large part because those damned stupid kid (s) won't listen to him, the man who Actually Knows Better. So sorry, not buying your argument here as exculpatory from the charge given, even though it is *also* true that there's a lot of delightful irony in Snape's accurate (post facto, naturally) apperception of the situation. > Yes, he was wrong about Black laying a confundus charm, but neither > he nor any of the other adults, by Dumbledore's admission, would > believe anything Hermione or any other 13-year-old would say about > it, in light of the other evidence. It's not only that he's wrong--it's that in both the Shack and later, he refuses to, even when he clearly has the upper hand on the situation, even listen. Now, listies have come up with all sorts of baroque explanations for why this is smart of him, but at least in this situation, I'm not buying it. I think there's a parallel situation in the way that Snape is often convinced that he understands Harry Potter when no one else does. Look at how he's convinced he understands Harry's reaction to seeing the events in the Pensieve, when he couldn't be further from the truth. Or the reaction after the TWT candidates selection. Looks thematic to me. I'm not saying Snape is *always* wrong, far from it--even Harry knows he's often right. I think there's an interesting thematic thread to the ways in which Snape *is* wrong, though. > Leslie41: > > Meanwhile, his mentor seems to be siding with the kids. I'd be > upset as well. I find it also an ironic scene in retrospect, when we find out that hey! Severus Snape is the person in the Shack who was actually a Death Eater, yet he can't handle the idea of someone else getting a second chance. Funny, that. YMMV, but I've always read Dumbledore's "Let me talk to the kids alone" and his other language as "Severus, please, let me deal with this, I'll tell you about it later," giving Snape a chance to retreat gracefully. It's that Snape doesn't pick up the clue, and even goes to Fudge with his "Only hope Dumbledore isn't going to make problems" comment, that ends up making Snape look ridiculous. Interesting that Dumbledore *lets* Snape hang himself, isn't it? -Nora is also not used to early early morning light From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 26 05:02:04 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 05:02:04 -0000 Subject: Predictions about book 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152927 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > I'm going to make some predictions about book 7, I do this for the joy it will give others when it turns out that every one of them is wrong. Well, for whatever it's worth: > Tonks: OK.. I'll join in... just had a chat with Sibyll.. and a bit too much of her cooking sherry... as I slowing slip into a alcohol induced trance... Book 7 will be published on 7-7-7 (and shortly thereafter the RL Muggle world as we know it will come to an end.) DD will rise again (perhaps in Phoenix form) to help Harry in some way or Harry will hear him talking to him in his head, like a `wee small voice'. We will see Sirius again, but not on this side of the veil. Harry will find a way to transport himself into LV's body, or in some way they will be in the same body and Harry will have to use his feeling's of Love to push him out. Snape will die a hero. And either before or after Harry will forgive him. Harry will live and marry Ginny, and have 12 children. Maybe he will be the symbolic new Abraham. Muggles will become aware of the Wizarding world. I agree with Eggplant that Harry's patronus will become a phoenix. Harry will discover Aberforth and Aberforth will tell Harry something important. The Horcrux Hufflepuff cup is somewhere in Hogwarts, probably in the trophy room disguised as something else. That damn tiara might actually be important and not so innocent as it sounds. Either Narcissa or Lucius or both will do something to help bring LV down. I enjoy dressing up as Bella believe it or not, and for this reason I don't want her to die, but she probably will, perhaps at the hand of her sister. But I hope that Narcissa does not have to kill. We might find out that Narcissa was never a DE herself, but just carrying on the Black family values. Winky will recover from her addiction and she and Dobby will marry. Kreacher will die and Harry will see to it that his head is stuffed and placed on the wall in the Black family home with the rest of Kreacher's family. and, of course, Tonks and Lupin will marry and live happily ever after. .... Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.... Tonks_op From leslie41 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 05:10:53 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 05:10:53 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152928 > > Leslie41: > > Go back and look look at "Owl Post Again." > > Snape is furious because he believes that Harry has helped > > Sirius escape. > > > Nora: > That's a very nice dodge, but it absolutely does not deal with > Snape's hissy fit *in the Shack proper*, which escalates into > CAPSLOCK!Snape at one point--and *that* hissy fit is over > Hermione's suggestion that Snape doesn't know everything that's > going on here and he should maybe possibly do Sirius and Lupin the > courtesy of listening to their story. That suggestion is what > precipitates the explosion. He's angry in large part because > those damned stupid kid(s) won't listen to him, the man who > Actually Knows Better. Leslie41: I discussed this in the post below: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/152593 > Nora: > I think there's an interesting thematic thread to > the ways in which Snape *is* wrong, though. Leslie41: I'll have to think on that. > Nora: > YMMV, but I've always read Dumbledore's "Let me talk to the kids > alone" and his other language as "Severus, please, let me deal > with this, I'll tell you about it later," giving Snape a chance to > retreat gracefully. Leslie41: And to my mind, Dumbledore is wrongfully excluding Snape from this discussion, considering that Snape caught Black and tried to save the trio. It's very much his business, but Dumbledore pushes him off. Hey, I'm not saying that Dumbledore was WRONG, I'm just saying that I'm not giving Dumbledore bonus points for tact here. > Nora: > Interesting that Dumbledore *lets* Snape hang himself, isn't it? Leslie41: Yeah. Shows that Dumbledore isn't always considerate of Snape's feelings. But we know that from HBP. From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Fri May 26 01:04:17 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:04:17 EDT Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... Message-ID: <45f.1a0f1ff.31a7ae11@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152929 Neri (mailto:nkafkafi at yahoo.com) writes: So what we know for certain is that Snape produced 12 NEWT students who got EE or higher and wanted to continue with the subject. But is this number high, low or average? There are 25 students in this class. It looks like five different DADA teachers, three of them hopeless, produced more than *twice* the number of NEWT students that Snape produced during these same years. Clare: I have 25 A-level English students and 3 A-level Drama students. Same teacher, different subjects - students make choices. There were three times as many students eligible to take English and twenty times as many eligible to take Drama. They *choose* their subjects. Just because only 12 (I don't remember this reference so I am taking your word for it) took it, it doesn't mean that only 12 *could* take it. Additionally, Snape prescribed that only those who got an "O" could take NEWT level Potions and, as far as I remember, there was no reference to any other student besides Harry taking advantage of Slughorn's lower standards. So that would be 11 students who achieved the highest possible grade AND chose to take the subject. If there are 600 students in the school and we assume that the yearly intake is about the same, that means that there are approximately 85 students per year. If only 11 achieved the top grade (which is not stated or assumable) then 13% of that year's students got an "O". There are schools which get a similar percentage to this on the top *three* grades. To explain, schools are compared on how many students get 5 A*-C grade passes - the average is 40% of a year achieving this, but I know of several which got 12% last year and that's the equivalent of counting EEs and As as well as Os.. For a school of 600, 12 isn't bad. My school has 1300 pupils and we have classes of 12 - some of them sciences! smiles, Clare xx (who feels like she is suddenly defending Snape in a tribunal, LMAO.) From divya_thomas1 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 04:33:16 2006 From: divya_thomas1 at yahoo.com (divya_thomas1) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 04:33:16 -0000 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152930 Personally, I think he deserved what he got for trusting Snape. Snape was evil and everyone knowing the fact he was a death eater did not trust him. And Maybe if there is an unbreakable vow between Snape and Dumbledore, it would have been cancelled the moment he killed Dumbledore and Snape must have planned this all the way. Any Arguments? "divya_thomas1" From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 26 05:27:00 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 05:27:00 -0000 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152931 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "divya_thomas1" wrote: > > Personally, I think he deserved what he got for trusting Snape. Snape was evil and everyone knowing the fact he was a death eater did not trust him. And Maybe if there is an unbreakable vow between Snape and Dumbledore, it would have been cancelled the moment he killed Dumbledore and Snape must have planned this all the way. Any Arguments? > Tonks: First that is "Professor Dumbledore"!!! You will get lots of arguments. Allow me to be the first. Snape is DDM all the way. And as Lupin says "if DD says that he trust Snape, so do I". We have hashed all of this out before, over an over again. All I can say is that DD is a wise, brave, noble and brilliant man. THE greatest wizard of all time. I trust him 100%. He has his reasons for trusting Snape and he had his reasons to die when he did. He could have saved himself if he had wanted to do so. He CHOSE to die. And Snape was only carrying out his orders. DD's orders. Tonks_op DD's most loyal and faithful servant From enlil65 at gmail.com Fri May 26 06:54:48 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 01:54:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Predictions about book 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1789c2360605252354i411b63d6o101f618e83737adf@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152932 On 5/25/06, Najwa wrote: > Now if Harry was a Horcrux, he would have to destroy all the other > horcruxes and the walking talking new Voldie. I think this will lead > to a scene when, after all the horcruxes were destroyed, Harry will > finally face Voldemort and destroy him. A few minutes of celebration > and triumph will follow, until the Voldie horcrux stuck in the Scar > will begin to retaliate and laugh in Harry's face and begin an > internal battle. Peggy W: An interesting idea, but I see a problem with it: we haven't seen a self-activating Horcrux. It would seem that the Horcruxes just sit there, and require an agent to actively do something to bring about the return of the person they are protecting. Would Voldemort have lain dormant for over a decade if it were possible for him to "reactivate" himself through Harry? I don't think so; he had to wait for Quirrell to come by before he could do anything useful, and when that attempt failed he had to wait for Wormtail to help him come back several years later. Even the diary which was not an ordinary Horcrux required Ginny's assistance to start regenerating Tom. I think a destroyed-except-one-Horcrux Voldemort would be even weaker than the Vapormort that the series started out with; so the cycle would begin again, and maybe in 50 years he'd be back... We could postulate that the situation may be different once there is only one Horcrux left, but personally I am more than a little skeptical. To continue with your scenario: another outcome of this line of thought might be that after defeating the physical Voldemort Harry would realize he is still carrying Voldemort inside him. There would be no confrontation or battle with this dormant bit, but Harry would then have to realize that he will have to sacrifice himself in order to assure the safety of the world. Perhaps this makes sense of "neither can live while the other survives". If this is the case, Dumbledore's statement in PS/SS that Harry will have the scar for his entire life will indeed be true. Let's go a little farther with this. If Harry has this realization, and is willing (actively decides) to sacrifice himself because he truly feels the full meaning of it all, that feeling may force out that last bit of Voldemort (similar to the MoM possession where Harry's feeling of love was intolerable to Voldemort). If that happens, perhaps he then could live; and perhaps even without the scar. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Fri May 26 10:09:24 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 10:09:24 -0000 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152933 divya_thomas1: > > Personally, I think he deserved what he got for trusting Snape. Snape > was evil and everyone knowing the fact he was a death eater did not > trust him. And Maybe if there is an unbreakable vow between Snape and > Dumbledore, it would have been cancelled the moment he killed > Dumbledore and Snape must have planned this all the way. Any Arguments? Ceridwen: First, what sort of UV are you talking about? I personally think that UVs are, if not Dark magic, then so close that DD would not ask his people to take one. Dumbledore so far has shown himself to prefer voluntary promises from his people, as when he asked Harry to follow all of his orders without question before taking him to the sea cave. Second, if Snape planned to kill Dumbledore, then why didn't he do it in a more subtle manner? He had the chance to allow DD to die from the curse which killed his hand. Instead, he saved him. I hope I'm interpreting 'Snape must have planned this all the way' correctly here! Third, it was Draco's assignment from LV to kill Dumbledore. We hear through Harry's eavesdropping that Snape was trying to find out what Draco was doing as late as Christmas. He may have known the assignment, he may not have. Fourth, others trusted Snape on DD's word, but Dumbledore had some special knowledge that we don't know, and that he didn't see fit to share with anyone else. If Snape having been a Death Eater was all there was to it, then I might agree. But all through the series, whenever the subject is brought up, Dumbledore asserts that he trusts Snape completely. And in HBP there is a moment, after Harry finds out from Trelawney that Snape is the one who overheard the Prophecy, when it looks like DD will say more, perhaps give a reason. He decides against this, but it does strongly imply that there is more to what DD knows than just Snape's public history. In any event, we can't judge DD based on what someone else knows. Until we know what Dumbledore knew, we are left with speculation. Ceridwen. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 11:36:39 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 11:36:39 -0000 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152934 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "divya_thomas1" wrote: > > Personally, I think he deserved what he got for trusting Snape. Snape > was evil and everyone knowing the fact he was a death eater did not > trust him. And Maybe if there is an unbreakable vow between Snape and > Dumbledore, it would have been cancelled the moment he killed > Dumbledore and Snape must have planned this all the way. Any Arguments? Alla: Hehe. You won't get any arguments from me that the possibility that DD trust in Snape was, how would we put it.... not justified. But that is as Ceridwen said ... all we left with is speculation, since we don't know for sure the reason why. Believe me, if DD trust WAS justified, I would want a VERY good reason for that. But no, I don't think that DD got what he deserved. How can giving people second chances can ever be wrong? Now those people throwing away those second chances, that's tragic, yes. IMO. Oh, and I don't see DD as person making any kind of UVs. They seem kind of dark to me too and as we know DD does not like doing dark magic. :) Oh, and while I think that Snape killed DD because he was saving himself, NOT because DD ordered him to do so, I unfortunately don't think that Snape planned it all along. Unfortunately, I think that Snape truly felt trapped on the Tower. Not that I think that he found the best way to deal with it. ;) JMO, Alla. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri May 26 13:29:23 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 13:29:23 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... In-Reply-To: <45f.1a0f1ff.31a7ae11@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152935 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ClareWashbrook at ... wrote: > > Neri (mailto:nkafkafi at ...) writes: > > So what we know for certain is that Snape produced 12 NEWT students > who got EE or higher and wanted to continue with the subject. But is > this number high, low or average? > > There are 25 students in this class. It looks like five different > DADA teachers, three of them hopeless, produced more than *twice* the > number of NEWT students that Snape produced during these same years. > > Clare:> > If there are 600 students in the school and we assume that the yearly intake > is about the same, that means that there are approximately 85 students per > year. If only 11 achieved the top grade (which is not stated or assumable) > then 13% of that year's students got an "O". Potioncat: We are such fools to spend so much time over numbers and calculations when our source for the numbers is JKR. I'm sure in the RW, if we were her accountants, she would be providing us with good, strong data. But, unfortunately, she did not have Harry overhear the teachers comparing the data from the Department of Testing and Evaluation. So we don't know how the OWLs broke down. If we insist on calculations, I think we have to use 40 as a base. No matter how many students JKR may indicate is in Harry's class, she only created 40. So if 10 out of 40 made O in Potions, it would be 20 out of 80...etc. But even then, we don't know how many others made the score, but didn't take the course. Potions is the sort of course, like chemistry that you take if you need it. No one takes it for fun unless they're planning to be a scientist. Neri, you're being very logical.Might I remind you that wizards are rarely logical. It would make perfect sense that the Prophet would publish the new changes at Hogwarts. It would make more sense that Hogwarts would send letters telling students their OWL results, confirming the class assignment and giving them the supply list. Yet, it says in canon that McGonagall is going around at breakfast confirming whether the students met the OWL requirements for classes. That tells me the Deputy Headmistress doesn't even know the OWL grades for Gryffindors. We seem to have a good idea of how many students are in some of the NEWT level classes, but we don't know how many could have been. I could probably make a case that DADA is required. You either take NEWT level or you take remedial. I could even quote canon to make it a sound theory. In that case, only those 25 (I'm taking your number here) met the requirements, leaving us still uncertain of how many met the requirements for Potions. However, I really think more students would want to take DADA than would want to take Potions. (No matter who is teaching it.) Snape said he had a high pass rate and expected everyone in that class of Gryffindor-Slytherin to pass. He expected 100% pass. He expected Longbottom, Crabbe and Goyle to pass. Passing OWL doesn't get you into NEWT level, even with Slughorn. Before HBP the list debated what Snape's comment really meant and how it would play out. We talked about what numbers that might be or hwo it might compare to other courses. "A high pass rate" may mean that more of Snape's students pass each year than passed during Slughorn's terms. Again, we didn't get to overhear McGonagall say to Snape, "I'm so surprised that Longbottom did so well on the Potions OWL...and to think Crabbe and Goyle passed. With scores like this, Severus, you'll be seeing a merit raise this year." Yes, well, if that conversation did take place, Snape blew the raise. My reaction after HBP was that the OWLs were very important to Percy, Hermione and us, to a lesser degree to Ron and Harry, but not at all to JKR. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri May 26 13:50:16 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 13:50:16 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152936 Nora: > It's not only that he's wrong--it's that in both the Shack and later, > he refuses to, even when he clearly has the upper hand on the > situation, even listen. Now, listies have come up with all sorts of > baroque explanations for why this is smart of him, but at least in > this situation, I'm not buying it. Pippin: As Snape was overpowered in the Shrieking Shack, he clearly didn't have the upper hand. A bit surprising, considering the way he dealt with Harry so handily in HBP, but then he had a problem with Fluffy, too. Couldn't keep an eye on all three heads at once, you see. Snape knew he was at a disadvantage, and his mind ran through the very old script we saw in the pensieve, IMO. I wonder whether nice vs good is the right way to frame the question. What about compassion vs morality? Framed that way we can see both as essential components of goodness. Dumbledore would be Rowling's epitome of goodness because he exemplifies both. Snape seems almost incapable of compassion, which makes him such a pain to be around, while Lupin is an extremely compassionate man. But his compassion has limits -- you have to identify with someone before you can feel compassion, and Lupin only identifies with people who like him. He doesn't give a brass galleon about anyone else. Lupin is certainly better company. The moralists in canon -- young!Hermione, Percy, Snape and (ugh!) Umbridge (she's not a very *good* moralist, but a moralist she is) -- they're always sure they're doing the right thing. It seldom occurs to them that they might be wrong. Human judgement being what it is though, even the innately good Hermione doesn't have any friends until she loosens up a little. Lupin is often filled with guilt -- but the trouble with with guilt is it mostly kicks in *after* you've done something wrong. If Lupin were moral, he would anticipate his guilty feelings and stop himself *before* he had something to feel guilty about it. But he never does, does he? Nora: Interesting that Dumbledore *lets* Snape hang himself, isn't it? Pippin: It's in Dumbledore's interest to portray himself as someone who sees only the good in people. If he is supposed to be overlooking Snape's viscious streak, then he has to let Snape demonstrate it, doesn't he? Not compassionate in a narrow sense, perhaps, but moral, if moral means behaving as you would if your compassion encompassed every sentient creature. Pippin From estesrandy at yahoo.com Fri May 26 13:50:07 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 13:50:07 -0000 Subject: The End of Evil? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152937 I have read alot of discussions about Harry destroying Voldemort to bring an end to evil in the Wizard World. This follows a Western philosophy of Beginning, Middle, and End. Followed of course by Good lived happily ever after. In the World that I live in, this does not appear to be the case. The Soviet Union falls with the Berlin Wall and the Cold War comes to an end. Followed by the rise of various tribal disputes in Bosnia, the Middle East, etc.....Followed by world terrorism.....conflicts, etc... One would think that Evil is not something that goes away just because one evil person or being is destroyed. Eastern philosophy talks about balance between two opposing sides in a continuous struggle which in reality is the personal struggle within everyone between positive and negative forces. I believe that JKR will not write another of the happily ever after book series to add to the pile. I think something else must be in store for us. Perhaps the evil within Voldemort and the Death Eaters must be overcome somehow like the fall of the Berlin Wall. Perhaps the hatred within Harry will be overcome by the Love within Harry. I just think JKR wants to communicate real life concepts to children in a setting that they can easily understand. This allows the children to see these concepts as they grow up and know them for what they are. The way to really zing the mass of readers is to show them their own negative energies that lie within. We are constantly being led to like certain characters and dislike (or hate) other characters. We have been tricked before, and I think we will be tricked again. Our strong desire to destroy evil and live happily ever after is ripe for a little zinging. Randy (who did not intend to write so much...Sorry about that) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri May 26 14:56:50 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 14:56:50 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death In-Reply-To: <700201d40605250943i7d6b24d9la31bd27b2a27a206@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152938 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kemper wrote: > > Kemper now: > I can't agree less. Death is needed in Life. It is not evil. It's the 'next great adventure' according to DD. > > What LV represents in this seven book long struggle is Fear. He lives in fear. It's not that LV wants to live forever because there's so much to see and do in Life; it's that LV never wants to die because he's afraid of Death. > > Where LV represents Fear, Harry represents Courage. > LV represents Apathy; Harry represents Love. > LV represents Selfishness; Harry represents Compassion. Tonks: Holding up hand, counting.. 1, 2.. maybe.. 2 and 1/2... hum... is it possible I could be wrong.. a 3rd time in my *entire* life?? hum... really hate to admit it to the *whole* world if I am... hum... Well, maybe... just maybe... Ah.ha.... remembering something now.. yes.. yes.. I think the quoit goes something like this "Love castest out fear".. so maybe Kemper is sort of right. It is not death vs. Love it is Fear vs. Love??? Maybe... Tonks_op From divinia.estillore at lycos.com Fri May 26 06:24:29 2006 From: divinia.estillore at lycos.com (Divinia Estillore) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 22:24:29 -0800 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? Message-ID: <20060526062429.AFD40338C6@ws7-3.us4.outblaze.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152939 > divya_thomas1 wrote: > Personally, I think he deserved what he got for trusting Snape. Snape was evil and everyone knowing the fact he was a death eater did not trust him. And Maybe if there is an unbreakable vow between Snape and Dumbledore, it would have been cancelled the moment he killed Dumbledore and Snape must have planned this all the way. Any Arguments? > Tonks: >> He has his reasons for trusting Snape and he had his reasons to die when he did. << ninia: I don't think DD deserves what SS did to him. But not matter what DD took himself with his trust to SS, what matters is the trust is all out for SS. There's something important between the two of them that makes DD trust SS so much. I salute DD for that. SS might be stupid but DD has his reasons. ninia From keithooh1984 at time.net.my Fri May 26 07:11:00 2006 From: keithooh1984 at time.net.my (Keith Ooh ) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 15:11:00 +0800 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? Message-ID: <2185625dc0.25dc021856@time.net.my> No: HPFGUIDX 152940 > "divya_thomas1": > Personally, I think he deserved what he got for trusting Snape. > And Maybe if there is an unbreakable vow between Snape and > Dumbledore, it would have been cancelled the moment he killed > Dumbledore and Snape must have planned this all the way. Dumbledore did not make an unbreakable vow with Snape... If Snape broke the vow, he would die immediately! Dumbledore trusted Snape to take care of the interests of the order! Tzenipie From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 15:37:51 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 15:37:51 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152941 > Leslie41: > But I don't agree that nice = kind. > Lanval: My trusty old Random House Dictionary does, however. nice: 1. pleasing; agreeable; delightful: a nice visit 2. amiably pleasant, kind. Then follows a list of other meanings, such as 'accurate, precise", and a few archaic ones. It also lists as an interesting side note the following: Usage: The semantic history of 'nice' is varied, as the etymology and the obsolete senses attest, and any attempt to insist on only one of its senses as correct will not be in keeping with the facts of the way the word is used. If any criticism is valid, it might be that the word is used too often and has become a cliche lacking the qualities of precision and intensity embodied in many of its synonyms. > > Lanval: > > Can you name one of those acts? > > Leslie41: > If one defines "compassion" as the awareness of suffering and the > wish to stop it, or to prevent it, I can name many. Starting with > his work as a spy, and his attempts to save Harry's life. Lanval: *IF* he decided to work as a spy to stop people suffering from LV's reign of terror. Intent is everything with acts of compassion. About saving Harry's life again: Let's take the first attempt, at the Quidditch match. So far the explanation we got from canon is that Snape was trying to save Harry because of a life debt he owed him. That's fulfilling a vow, and on top of it all, it serves to make Snape feel better. Not compassion. Next -- at the end of HBP, which you mentioned in another post. Snape yells at the DEs to leave Potter for LV, right? Stop it, Severus! I can't take that much compassion... No, seriously. Until we know beyond any doubt what Snape's role was in that book, and whether he's only acting the DE here, I will not pass judgment. Besides, strictly speaking, Snape does not save Harry 's life -- the DE is 'only' using the Cruciatus Curse. Now, the Shrieking Shack. Possibility #1: Snape sees the map in Lupin's office, thinking, oh SH*T, look at that %#$#@ Potter-brat and his %$#& friends -- got themselves caught by Black, and that traitor Lupin! Now *I* need to go save them! Curse the day that little moron showed his bespectacled mug here! *runs to the WW, foaming and cussing all the way* Act of compassion? Maybe. Mostly an act of duty, being that he's a teacher and thus responsible for the welfare of the kids. Personally I don't think he'd bat an eyelash if Harry got seriously hurt. Since Snape's behavior upon entering the Shack clearly denotes that glee over catching Black and Lupin is his current ruling sentiment, saving the kids becomes merely a side effect (if a rather positive one; Order of Merlin, anyone?) So, possibility # 2 seems more likely: Snape sees the map, thinking, HA! I knew it! Gotcha, Black -- and you too, Lupin! Damn that Potter, he's there too... hope he won't get in my way, what with his stupidity and all. *runs to the WW, grinning madly* SO not compassionate. Leslie41: > There are many others. Merely refusing to grant Umbridge the > veritaserum, for example. Lanval: What? I was under the impression that he gave it to her, and she tried to use it on Harry -- and when she wanted more, he said there wasn't any. Perhaps I'm overlooking something? > > Leslie41: > Nothing James, or Sirius, or Tobias ever did to Snape absolves him > of responsibility. Snape knows that, and I think that is why he is > working for the defeat of Voldemort. Lanval: Then that was a misunderstanding on my part. I thought you really were saying that J & S were to blame for Snape's decison. Sorry. From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Fri May 26 16:25:54 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:25:54 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kemper wrote: > > > > Kemper now: > > I can't agree less. Death is needed in Life. It is not evil. > It's the 'next great adventure' according to DD. > > > > What LV represents in this seven book long struggle is Fear. He > lives in fear. It's not that LV wants to live forever because > there's so much to see and do in Life; it's that LV never wants to > die because he's afraid of Death. > > > > Where LV represents Fear, Harry represents Courage. > > LV represents Apathy; Harry represents Love. > > LV represents Selfishness; Harry represents Compassion. > > > Tonks: > Holding up hand, counting.. 1, 2.. maybe.. 2 and 1/2... hum... is it > possible I could be wrong.. a 3rd time in my *entire* life?? hum... > really hate to admit it to the *whole* world if I am... hum... > > Well, maybe... just maybe... Ah.ha.... remembering something now.. > yes.. yes.. I think the quoit goes something like this "Love castest > out fear".. so maybe Kemper is sort of right. It is not death vs. > Love it is Fear vs. Love??? > > Maybe... Geoff: The full quote is: "There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." (1 John 4:18 New International Version of the Bible) We're back to what we mean by love.... From ejblack at rogers.com Fri May 26 16:29:08 2006 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:29:08 -0000 Subject: sexy Snape? JKRs men In-Reply-To: <20060526022025.60941.qmail@web31910.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152943 Here might be a place to speculate on something that bothers me a bit. I find Lupin a very attractive person (besides his little furry problem), and obviously he is a very competant wizard. Why are his clothes always worn or a bit ragged? Can't he do a repair spell? I know I am making a fuss over nothing; his clothes are worn because that is part of Rowling's characterization (spelling?) of him, but still.... Jeanette From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Fri May 26 16:29:21 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:29:21 -0000 Subject: Snape, Apologies, and Redemption--Lupin vs. DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152944 Tara Tierney: > I think that, whether he intended to or not, Snape has made the two > of them stronger people. If Snape wasn't there to shame Neville out > of his shell or just plain shame Harry, how do you think they'd have > turned out? I think that Harry would be less full of rage and Neville would be more self-confident. And that they'd both be better at Potions. Amiable Dorsai From bawilson at citynet.net Fri May 26 16:31:26 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:31:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: End of Voldemort = End of Evil Message-ID: <25708.129.71.218.25.1148661086.squirrel@citymail.citynet.net> No: HPFGUIDX 152945 Randy: "I have read a lot of discussions about Harry destroying Voldemort to bring an end to evil in the Wizard World. This follows a Western philosophy of Beginning, Middle, and End. Followed of course by Good lived happily ever after. BAW: JKR is seen by somenot entirely accurately, IMHO, but not entirely inaccurately eitheras the literary heiress of the Inklings (CSL, JRRT, and to a lesser extent CW). While the NARNIA books do indeed end with Narnia destroyed and Aslan leading his people into a glorious new paradise, CSL does make it clear that this is not the WHOLE story. Queen Susan was excludednot for all time, but for now. Back in the shadow England she is a young woman who has just lost her parents and siblings in an horrific railway accident. We do not know if she will ultimately find her way back to Narniashe may, or she may not. (I am told that an Anglican nun in Canada has written a sequel in which Queen Susan DOES return to Narnia; the Lewis Estate will not let her publish it, however.) LOTR, indeed does end with Sauron defeated and the Numenorian Monarchy restored, but at a pricethe Elves are leaving Middle Earth, taking with them much of great beauty, power, and wisdom. And Gandalf gives a strong warning that the downfall of Sauron is NOT the end of evil in Middle Earth. He says, "After a defeat, and a respite, the Dark Power arises again in a new shape." (This is from memory, so I may have the wording quite right.) Thus, your analysis of the Western literary heritage, and the particular strand of it from which JKR comes, is overly simplistic. That being said, I agree with your conclusion that the defeat of Voldemort will not mean the end of evil in the WW. Voldemort himself was preceded by Grindelwald (sp.?) and the Knights of St. Walpurgis; we have met at least one nasty piece of work who is no Death Eater (Professor Umbridge). Any fan who thinks that the end of Voldemort will mean the end of evil is totally naive. BAW From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri May 26 18:21:56 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 18:21:56 -0000 Subject: Tangent: Horcrus/Souls Destroyed (was: Predictions ... book 7) In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605252354i411b63d6o101f618e83737adf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152946 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy Wilkins" wrote: > > > Peggy W: > ...edited... > > I think a destroyed-except-one-Horcrux Voldemort would be even > weaker than the Vapormort that the series started out with; so > the cycle would begin again, and maybe in 50 years he'd be back... > > We could postulate that the situation may be different once there > is only one Horcrux left, but personally I am more than a little > skeptical. > bboyminn: I'm really straying off on a tangent here, but I think it is something we need to resolve. We speak of destroying that Horcruxes and destroying the soul bits as if they were one thing. The Horcrux seems to be the /container/ in which the 'soul bit' is stored, or trapped, if you prefer. So, when you destroy the container, are you merely releasing the 'soul bit' so that it is no longer Earth-Bound, or are people assuming that bit of the soul is destroyed in the process? Admittedly, it is a very fine distinction since the end result is virtually the same. However, people have spoken of Voldemort being diminished as each soul piece is lost, I don't think that is true. He has already lost those soul bits and that is why he is currently diminished or less human. If Harry destroys the Horcruxes, and the soul bit do what ever they do, I don't see Voldemort changing. Although, I don't think it is true, one could speculate that the 'soul bits' will return to the 'core soul' once released, and in that case, Voldemort WILL change, but he will become /more/ human not less. Interesting thought, if this is true, then we could speculate that Harry will face, not Voldemort, but full human, or nearly human, Tom Riddle in the end. Also, I'm under the impression that the Auxiliary Horcruxes/soul pieces must be destroyed first, then when they are destroy, Harry can go after what I refer to as the 'Core Soul' contained in Voldemort's body. > Peggy W continues: > > To continue with your scenario: another outcome of this line of > thought might be that after defeating the physical Voldemort > Harry would realize he is still carrying Voldemort inside him. > There would be no confrontation or battle with this dormant bit, > but Harry would then have to realize that he will have to > sacrifice himself in order to assure the safety of the world. > Perhaps this makes sense of "neither can live while the other > survives". ... > bboyminn: I realize that you are just speculating on the possibilities, so I'm not necessarily trying to shoot down your scenario, but it does seem to beg the question, can Voldemort be destroyed while a 'soul bit' remains in Harry? It would seem that Voldemort's core soul, Voldemort's 'self', would remain earthbound as long as any soul bit remains. Which means in the scenario you described above, Voldemort would revert back to his Vapormort form. Harry would then be faced with the task of somehow destroying the soul bit that remains in himself, then in turn, he would have to figure out how to kill a Voldemort that no longer had a body. That doesn't seem like an easy task, and perhaps an even impossible one. We can speculate that by taking on a body, Voldemort has opened himself to the possibility of death if the right circumstances can be created, but lacking a body, how do you kill something that has no physical presence? > Peggy W concludes: > > Let's go a little farther with this. If Harry has this realization, > and is willing (actively decides) to sacrifice himself because he > truly feels the full meaning of it all, that feeling may force out > that last bit of Voldemort (similar to the MoM possession where > Harry's feeling of love was intolerable to Voldemort). If that > happens, perhaps he then could live; and perhaps even without the > scar. > > -- > Peggy Wilkins bboyminn: Again, not necessarily trying to shoot down your idea, just trying to get everyone working from the same common understanding of what we are working with, to the extent that that is possible. If fact, this last part is very intriguing. I have speculated a situation where Harry possesses Voldemort, and extending that to your idea, that possession could drive out BOTH the last soul bit and Voldemort's core soul. Perhaps Voldemort would abandon physical form to escape the pain not realizing that he would be taking his core soul and the last soul bit with him, and thereby, release his soul in a way that it was no longer earthbound. In otherwords, he would really die. Still, I'm intrigued by the Veil, and would prefer to somehow work it into the final solution. Perhaps Harry possesses Voldemort and drags him into the Veil, and that brings an earthly end to the soul bit, the core soul, and ultimately Voldemort. Now the question is, is there a way for Harry to return from behind the Veil? I have speculations that have already been posted, so I won't bore everyone with it again. Just curious. Steve/bboyminn From lisabiles at grandecom.net Fri May 26 18:36:30 2006 From: lisabiles at grandecom.net (leb2323) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 18:36:30 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes - Power- and Tiara In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152947 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > Also did anyone notice the reference to a tiara twice in HBP? Molly > is going to give one to Fleur to wear at the wedding and there is an > old one in the Room of Requirement. Wonder if it could be a > horcrux? I don't like the fact that there are two of them and in a > sort of throw-away line kind of way that would lead any Auror to > wonder.. leb: I think that Harry is going to notice the tiara at the wedding and think it looks familiar but not remember why. It won't be until he overhears Molly talking about how great aunt whoever-she-was had it made to be exactly like the own that Rowena Ravenclaw used to wear that he'll connect it with the one at Hogwarts which is the horcrux. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Fri May 26 18:36:14 2006 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (Ffred Clegg) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 19:36:14 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Umbridge and Fudge References: <1148567502.15722.74328.m33@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000901c680f3$4627cea0$da096bd5@Billie> No: HPFGUIDX 152948 Carol wrote: >noting that Umbridge is Fudge's Senior Undersecretary and Percy >is his Junior Assistant, and wondering if Umbridge is also responsible >for, erm, brainwashing Percy Nothing quite so subtle, I think (and didn't JKR confirm that Percy was acting of his own free will?) But Percy's associating every day with these two (and others in their circle) and he's got no other influences to countervail them (whatever _did_ happen to Penny?): he's drinking his morning coffee with them, going for a beer at lunchtime, taking notes at meetings - it would be very hard for a young and impressionable man like Percy not to get sucked in to their way of thinking. hwyl Ffred (who can't help thinking about the speech by David Owen back in the early 80s when he talked about the "politics of fudge and mudge") From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri May 26 18:47:55 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 18:47:55 -0000 Subject: The End of Evil? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152949 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Randy" wrote: > > ...edited... > > In the World that I live in, this does not appear to be the case. > The Soviet Union falls with the Berlin Wall and the Cold War comes > to an end. Followed by the rise of various tribal disputes in > Bosnia, the Middle East, etc.....Followed by world > terrorism.....conflicts, etc... > > One would think that Evil is not something that goes away just > because one evil person or being is destroyed. > > ... > > I believe that JKR will not write another of the happily ever > after book series to add to the pile. ... I just think JKR wants > to communicate real life concepts to children in a setting that > they can easily understand. This allows the children to see > these concepts as they grow up and know them for what they are. > > The way to really zing the mass of readers is to show them their > own negative energies that lie within. ... We have been tricked > before, and I think we will be tricked again. Our strong desire > to destroy evil and live happily ever after is ripe for a little > zinging. > > Randy (who did not intend to write so much...Sorry about that) > bboyminn: Oh, you are absolutely right, evil will never be removed from this earth until the Second Comming. Harry may be able to destroy one evil, but without a doubt, eventually, another evil will spring up to take it's place. But by then a new young hero will have taken Harry's place, and Harry won't have to carry the level of burden he now faces. I have often speculated a final scenario in which Voldemort isn't truly destroyed, he is merely returned to 'Vapormort' and his followers rounded up an imprisioned. Of course, in this example, I always pictured Dumbledore there in the End of Book Talk telling Harry that evil is never truly vanquished, that life is a never ending battle to hold evil at bay when it appears. Well, Dumbledore's gone, and that particular idea is wearing a little thin now that we know there is a way to fully destory Voldemort, but to your basic concept, certainly there will always be evil on this earth, and I think that is a valuable lesson for adults and children alike. If I may quote Mad-Eye Moody - CONSTANT VIGILANCE. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 19:21:28 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 19:21:28 -0000 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152950 Alla wrote: Believe me, if DD trust WAS justified, I would want a VERY good reason for that. Carol responds: So do we all, regardless of which side of the Snape fence we're on. Unlike you, I'm hoping that DD was right to trust Snape. I'd much rather that DD not be shown to be "a stupid old man," as Draco puts it. But otherwise, we agree on this point. > Alla: > But no, I don't think that DD got what he deserved. How can giving > people second chances can ever be wrong? Carol: Exactly. Alla: Now those people throwing away those second chances, that's tragic, yes. IMO. Carol: But did Snape throw away the second chance? We don't know yet. And IMO, he's an even more tragic figure if he *didn't* throw away his second chance, if, ironically, he was forced *by loyalty* to kill the man he was loyal to. (To hold this view, it's necessary to believe that DD would have died in any case and that DD preferred to be killed by Snape rather than by the DEs, Draco, or the poison. That's what I think. I also believe that DD didn't want Snape to die from breaking the UV because it was essential for him to get Draco and Harry off the tower and the DEs out of Hogwarts, as no one else could have done. I know you don't hold this view, but it fits with Snape saving Harry from the Crucio.) > Alla: > Oh, and I don't see DD as person making any kind of UVs. They seem > kind of dark to me too and as we know DD does not like doing dark > magic. :) Carol: On this point, you and I are in perfect agreement. Whatever caused DD to trust Snape, it is not a vow that would have forced Snape to die if he broke it. DD is not Narcissa, who wants Snape's help to protect her son and doesn't care that he's putting his life on the line by doing so. As Ceridwen said, DD may pressure people to promise to obey him absolutely (Harry's promise before entering the cave), but he will not condemn them to death if they refuse to swear obedience. (Snape did promise something, if Hagrid's report of the overheard conversation is accurate, but we don't know what it was, and I doubt very much if the promise involved a UV. (Who would the bonder have been? Hagrid, who can't keep a secret to save his life and would also be reluctant to perform Dark magic?) So, yes, I agree with you completely here. > Alla: > Oh, and while I think that Snape killed DD because he was saving > himself, NOT because DD ordered him to do so, I unfortunately don't > think that Snape planned it all along. Carol: Here's where we differ, in part. I don't think that Snape killed DD to save himself. The hatred and revulsion on his face don't fit with that motive. I think that, like Harry in the cave, he was filled with self-hatred and revulsion at what he was being forced, by the UV and by unforeseen circumstances and by Dumbledore's wishes, to do. I think that the last thing he wanted was to be forced to return to the DEs as the murderer of the only man who ever trusted him. He would, I think, much rather have died heroically but futilely defending the dying Dumbledore from the DEs. But then Harry and Draco would also most likely have died, and DD's death would be for nothing. I do absolutely agree that Snape could not have planned to kill DD all along, given that he didn't know about Draco's plan for getting the DEs into Hogwarts. The only part I disagree with here is the word "unfortunately," which I take to mean that you're conceding the point reluctantly. :-) > Alla: > Unfortunately, I think that Snape truly felt trapped on the Tower. Carol: Again we agree, except for the word "unfortunately." Considering that DD had defeated LV in the MoM, there's no way that Snape could have anticipated a wandless, defenseless DD sliding helplessly down the wall. He must indeed have felt the UV closing in on him, with no way out of DD's murder except his own death, and he had only seconds to decide which of two terrible choices was the right one. Alla: Not that I think that he found the best way to deal with it. ;) Carol: Here we disagree. I don't think that Snape made the Wormtail-like choice of saving his skin at all costs. I think he knew what DD wanted and did exactly that, very much against his will, sacrificing his place in the Order and the respect of the WW and his personal freedom to obey DD's last, silent order. But regardless of the reason for the feeling of entrapment, yes, absolutely, he felt trapped as the UV and the DADA curse forced his hand. It's difficult to distinguish here between what is right and what is easy because neither choice is easy, and right depends on what we think DD wanted when he made his last, unstated request, "Severus, please." Snape is still "Severus"; DD still trusts him but has to beg him to do the right thing. Whether he did so or not remains to be seen, but there are indications (the peacefully sleeping portrait, the fact that Harry himself survived the encounter undetected by the DEs even though Snape himself almost certainly knew he was there) that Snape did what was right at a terrible cost to himself. At any rate, until Book 7 comes out, I think it's a mistake to assume that Snape is evil. Tragic, yes. A murderer, yes (unfortunately!). But ESE! or OFH!? The evidence is not all in, and only Dumbledore, erm, JKR, knows for certain where Snape's loyalties lie. Until then, all we can do is examine the canon and see where it leads us, and at this point it leads me to conclude that he's DDM. Carol From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 17:37:52 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 17:37:52 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152951 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > Lanval: > > > Or from a simple, basic feeling of goodwill towards > > others -- and likewise a reluctance to hurt others. > > Anything wrong with that? > > houyhnhnm: > > I would certainly agree that anyone fitting that description is a good > person. Who would you say fits that description in the Potterverse? Lanval: I'm really, really reluctant to put such labels on any of the young'uns. There are so many factors playing into kids' and teenagers' decisions and actions -- lack of experience, lack of independent thinking, peer pressure, hormones... I can see some of them going in the right direction (and I would agree that Luna, God love her, is one of them. Probably my favorite among the 'minor' kid characters). > houyhnhnm: > Among the adults, who qualifies for your definition of nice=good? Lanval: Arthur, Remus, Tonks, Hagrid, to name just a few. They're all on the right side, so they qualify as 'good', right? Mind, I don't think for a minute ANY of them is always nice/kind/polite. But on my personal Gray-Scale of Niceness, they all score somewhere in the ash/driftwood/pale pewter range. Snape's more of a charcoal. :) Molly and Sirius are a bit harder to define. Molly has too much of a Mother-Bear-thing going to be called 'nice', I think (though personally I'm very fond of her). But she gets a bit too riled up when she perceives an insult to any of her cubs (including Harry), and has then a habit of attacking before thinking. Sirius -- again, I can't find any hint of him being a Real Meanie, once he left school. He's rather sweet with the kids, and I greatly admire his self-control when one of the twins gets nasty with him in OotP (same when Molly slams him with what is probably THE ugliest remark of her career). Both times he realizes that they are under terrible stress, and he puts away his personal sentiments. But altogether he's so screwed in the head by the time he gets out of Azkaban, I'm loath to pass judgment on him. Dumbledore? Unfailingly polite and kind to people, most of the time, even if his actions aren't always. But JKR has called him the epitome of goodness, and I'm inclined to trust her. houyhnhnm: > On the other hand, the "nicest" person in the six books, and it is the > kind of "nice" that causes people to recoil from the word, is Dolores > Umbridge. She speaks with a "fluttery, girlish, high-pitched voice". > She gives "silvery" laughs. She never barges into the conversation, > but rather coughs delicately to signal her intention to speak ("/Hem, > hem/") She is unfailingly polite and pleasant. She smiles and speaks > sweetly, even when she is forcing Harry to carve sentences into the > back of his own hand. (Was anyone else reminded of Kafka's "In the > Penal Colony"?) I have no doubt she considers herself "nice". Lanval: Ah. Umbridge. She perfectly embodies the Superficially-Nice-but-Nasty- Inside type, doesn't she? Dear Dolores is a special case for me. I recall cries of woe following the release of OotP, about what a shallow two-dimensional villain she was. How boring! How lame of JKR! There must be another side of Umbridge, we never get to know her to see what makes her so nasty! I don't think Dolores Umbridge the Person matters at all, to JKR or the story. I see her as an allegory. For instance, in Thomas Mann's "The Magic Mountain", the character of Lodovico Settembrini represents Humanism, while his constant sparring partner Leo Naphta represents what might be called Religious Radicalism. To me, Umbrigde represents Fascism/Totalitarianism, in all its creeping menace, made all the more dangerous because of the banality of her appearance. Every child knows that when one encounters a monstrous slitty- nostrilled, red-eyed, madly cackling chap in a graveyard, it's time to be Very Afraid. But Umbridge, who looks "like someone's maiden aunt"? Who collects pictures of kittens? I grit my teeth every time I read one of her decrees. We see the very worst of her before we even encounter her as a character. Then we perk up a little at Hermione's unease at the introductory speech. And then it begins, slowly, but surely, a little freedom taken away here, a new rule in effect there. Soon it's too late. Umbridge has too much power, And then, once she's in total control, open revolution is the only way. Not sure if JKR intended this story arc as a Lesson to Remember. But if she did, she did it brilliantly, IMO. >houyhnhnm: > Lupin is also nice. His many sins of omission have been catalogued > elsewhere so I won't go into them here. While he may turn out to be > on the side of good, I have difficulty seeing him as an exemplar of > goodness. Lanval: Then you will do the same for Snape, right? On the good side, but certainly not 'a good person'? > > So I guess I am trying to say that I agree that nice can equal good > the way you define it, but I don't see too many characters in the > Potterverse who meet the criteria. Maybe the argument could be made > for Arthur Weasley. > Lanval: Well, I see quite a few, all flawed, but generally both nice and good. I do like your posting ID, btw. :) I had a very McGonagall-ish English professor in college, who threatened to take a whole grade off our essays every time we misspelled "Houyhnhnms'. From blink_883 at hotmail.com Fri May 26 18:00:45 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 18:00:45 -0000 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? In-Reply-To: <2185625dc0.25dc021856@time.net.my> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152952 "Keith Ooh " wrote: > Dumbledore did not make an unbreakable vow with Snape... If Snape > broke the vow, he would die immediately! Dumbledore trusted Snape to > take care of the interests of the order! > Hang on just a sec, does it say anywhere in canon that a broken UV would result in *immediate* death? It could be that a UV *was* made, but the death will come in a much subtler way - or less direct, for instance like in the Final Destination films, where the characters have been 'marked' by Death, but Death has to be given the chance to occur somehow, externally i mean, not just collapsing out of the blue. If this *is* the case (and I do doubt this theory somewhat), it could be that Snape will try harder now to make amends for any misdeeds, knowing that he is definitely going to die and (relatively) soon. Thus, IMO, the Selfish! Snape would live on, in a way. WG* From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 20:13:32 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 20:13:32 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152953 > >>Lanval: > > Personally I don't think he'd bat an eyelash if Harry got > seriously hurt. > Betsy Hp: Actually, Snape does more than bat an eyelash. He conjures a number of stretchers and carries Harry (and Sirius and Hermione and Ron) back to Hogwarts and up to the hospital wing. [PoA hardback, scholastic p.412] And while I'm quite sure you'll be able to come up with some reason to casually dismiss Snape's actions here (duty is a popular one ), it especially interesting when compared to Sirius's treatment of the unconsious Snape. We've also got the kind and compassionate Snape in "Spinner's End" when he's doing his best to comfort Narcissa. And there's the touching (IMO) moment when he saves Draco's life in the girls bathroom in "Sectumsepra" by singing Draco's wounds shut. Again, I'm sure there will be some reason that these incidents don't count for you, but this actually does a lot to demonstrate, IMO, the weakness of using "niceness" to define whether or not a person is good. Because, yes obviously there's a goodness in being kind, compassionate, polite, etc. For thinking of what others need before oneself. But we don't have the means to judge any of the characters on the above (except Harry) because we don't get a peek at their motivations. (e.g. Is Ron truly being nice when he points Fleur to the bouillabaisse, or was something else prompting him at that moment?) We *do* see our good guys act in ways that could never be defined as nice. Hagrid attacking a frightened muggle child because the child's father has angered him is by no means nice. Hermione branding a fellow classmate on the face is not a nice act either. Sirius knocking the unconscious Snape in the head wasn't nice, nor was he nice when he told Harry he didn't measure up to James. It hardly seems fair to suddenly expect Snape to measure up to something we don't seem to expect the "good guys" to measure up to. But that's the problem with niceness. It's a faulty and easily manipulated measuring stick. As Fake!Moody knew quite well. Betsy Hp From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 20:15:55 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 20:15:55 -0000 Subject: Shabby!Lupin (Was: sexy Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152954 Jeanette wrote: > Here might be a place to speculate on something that bothers me a > bit. I find Lupin a very attractive person (besides his little furry problem), and obviously he is a very competant wizard. Why are his clothes always worn or a bit ragged? Can't he do a repair spell? > > I know I am making a fuss over nothing; his clothes are worn because that is part of Rowling's characterization (spelling?) of him, but still.... Carol responds: Hi, Jeanette. I've had the same thought. I guess we're supposed to understand that Lupin has only one set of robes, which become more and more shabby each time he transforms while wearing them, and no source of income. Also, of course, the transformations are more violent and painful without the Polyjuice potion. But surely his friends could provide him with at least one set of self-mending, self-ironing robes from Madam Malkin's, which he could use on days when he's not going to transform and save the ragged ones for once a month? (I personally think that Sirius Black should have willed Lupin some of his money and all of his robes, if he had any to spare. Ah, well. Maybe DD will, and we'll see Lupin in purple robes with silver stars, and purple boots with silver buckles to match. Erm, maybe not.) But, yes. Surely Lupin knows some sort of repair spell that will work on robes (and what's with that battered old trunk?). Or Molly, who's good at what Tonks calls "householdy spells," could help him? Another illogical inconsistency that JKR didn't iron out because the plot requires him to look shabby? Or maybe he's too depressed to care, or his role as Spy!Lupin requires him to look shabby like the other werewolves? Carol, wondering what will happen to the spare robes and books and "stores" that Snape left at Hogwarts and wishing that Lupin could somehow make use of them From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 20:45:46 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 20:45:46 -0000 Subject: Percy under the influence (Was: Umbridge and Fudge) In-Reply-To: <000901c680f3$4627cea0$da096bd5@Billie> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152955 Carol earlier: > > >noting that Umbridge is Fudge's Senior Undersecretary and Percy is his Junior Assistant, and wondering if Umbridge is also responsible for, erm, brainwashing Percy > Ffred responded: Nothing quite so subtle, I think (and didn't JKR confirm that Percy was acting of his own free will?) But Percy's associating every day with these two (and others in their circle) and he's got no other influences to countervail them (whatever _did_ happen to Penny?): he's drinking his morning coffee with them, going for a beer at lunchtime, taking notes at meetings - it would be very hard for a young and impressionable man like Percy not to get sucked in to their way of thinking. > > hwyl > > Ffred (who can't help thinking about the speech by David Owen back in the early 80s when he talked about the "politics of fudge and mudge") > Carol responds: Right. I didn't mean brainwashing in the sense of an Imperius curse, just taking advantage of his youth and eagerness and devotion to the Ministry to indoctrinate him and turn him against Dumbledore. (I'm familiar with JKR's statement--in the FAQs, IIRC--that he was acting of his own free will.) Bad choice of words, I guess. I'm not familiar with the "fudge and mudge" speech, but it could have unconsciously influenced JKR even if she didn't deliberately borrow the term (rather like the "hogwort" lilies at Kew Gardens, which her subconscious mind apparently stored until she needed a name for her school). And what *did* happen to Penny? Maybe she'll be the next victim of the DEs and Percy will return to his family in abject grief and mortification? If so, I really hope they'll forgive him! Carol, imagining going out for coffee with Umbridge and gagging at the thought From estesrandy at yahoo.com Fri May 26 22:06:58 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 22:06:58 -0000 Subject: Percy under the influence (Was: Umbridge and Fudge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152956 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier: > > > > >noting that Umbridge is Fudge's Senior Undersecretary and Percy is > his Junior Assistant, and wondering if Umbridge is also responsible > for, erm, brainwashing Percy > > > Ffred responded: SNIP SNIP > drinking his morning coffee with them, going for a beer at lunchtime, > taking notes at meetings - it would be very hard for a young and > impressionable man like Percy not to get sucked in to their way of > thinking. > > > > hwyl > > > > Ffred (who can't help thinking about the speech by David Owen back > in the early 80s when he talked about the "politics of fudge and mudge") > > > > Carol responds: SNIP SNIP > Carol, imagining going out for coffee with Umbridge and gagging at the > thought > Umbridge is the spitting image of the Assistant Principal of my former High School. She obviously used her connections in Government to move up into the Ministry. My mom (rest her soul) once went toe to toe with her over my being late to register for classes for my Senior year. I think my mom would have cleaned house at the Ministry of Magic if she had the chance. Voldemort would have feared two people if he had met her on a bad day. ;0) Randy From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri May 26 22:32:36 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 22:32:36 -0000 Subject: Who's to blame? (and what's to be done?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152957 > > a_svirn: > > Oh? Then what's wrong with the Snape's comment? He stated that in his > > considered opinion everyone (Neville included) could scrape a pass > > grade. Surely a confidence boost of no common order. > Lupinlore: > Sigh. Except that he implied that Neville was a moron in the process, > surely a most unprofessional and unforgiveably cruel thing to do. a_svirn: Unprofessional? Certainly. Unforgivably cruel? Now, really. Turning Neville into a pariah among his own house-mates is unforgivably cruel. Implying that he's "moronic" is just unpardonably rude. > Lupinlore: > It would seem that we (most of us engaged in this particular subthread) > are groping toward a surprising amount of consensus, considering that > we are coming from very different directions. That is Hogwarts seems > to be an astonishingly badly organized and poorly run school. > > Who's to blame for that? I suppose you could say wizarding society as > a whole. a_svirn: Well, I agree with you that the wizarding society as a whole is rather uninspiring and the school is badly run. But then what? Should we leave it at that? Without, to use Snape's expression, "apportioning the blame"? I don't think so. For one thing it would rob us of the most favourite discussion topics, for another I don't believe in collective responsibility. Wizarding institutions may be as rotten as they come, but it does not count as an excuse either for Snape, or for McGonagall. And the "epitome of goodness's" behaviour should be a little less questionable even in the darkest of times and the lousiest of societies. From blink_883 at hotmail.com Fri May 26 17:50:40 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 17:50:40 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes - Power- and Tiara In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152958 "Tonks" wrote: > Also did anyone notice the reference to a tiara twice in HBP? Molly > is going to give one to Fleur to wear at the wedding and there is an > old one in the Room of Requirement. Wonder if it could be a > horcrux? I don't like the fact that there are two of them and in a > sort of throw-away line kind of way that would lead any Auror to > wonder.. WG* says: Yeah, I realised that the tiara might be significant actually when we are 100% sure that Draco has been using the room of requirement for his "evil ends". It introduces (well, to me!)the possibility that the room of requirement can be used for evil means. It has not got a "secrecy sensor". Isn't there a broke foe glass in there too or something? Anyway, my point is, the room provides, and doesn't seem to monitor. Maybe this is a loophole that was made on purpose (a bit like the law Arthur wrote...) an oversight from who created the room (maybe it's the Ravenclaw equivalent of the chamber of secrets??), or purposeful. If the room of requirement is even *more* important than we have so far been led to believe, for example if is *is* Ravenclaw's 'chamber', then it could be possible that Voldie hid or placed the tiara there after he was rejected for the post of DADA teacher. It seems that DD did not believe that Voldie *only* wanted to teach. What if Voldie wanted to hide that/a horcrux? Maybe he didn't have time or opportunity to go to the CoS (which he obv knew of at the time), and chose the next best thing - the RoR - concentrating on a room that where he could *hide* something. I realise that all of the above requires some leaping of faith, perhaps downright flying...but...is it so much more unbelievable than some of the other theories that we've (the fan community) come up with so far? "Tonks" wrote: > I hope that the tiara is just a tiara and not a murder > weapon.. I don't really care all that much for Fleur, but I would > not want to see Bill hurt anymore that he already has been. And I > don't want to see Molly killed either! > WG* says: Tonks_op, did you mean the tiara Molly will give Fleur when you said "the tiara" here? If so, Molly does say that it was made by goblins, doesn't she? Unfortunately (for me) I've lent my HBP to a friend so can't check atm. I doubt whether this object will prove to be harmful, as Bill would probably be able to tell if it was, wouldn't he? Both he and Arthur have after all had plenty of experience with objects that have been charmed to be harmful, in one way or another, and both have no doubt been affected by Moody's "constant vigilance" rule. On a side note - is the Moody we see in GoF close enough to the 'real thing' that we can interchange his/their personalities? I imagine that Crouch Jnr. may have seen or heard enough about Moody in Voldie's first reign of terror that he was able to pull this off, or are we to actually believe that in some ways, Moody and Crouch Jnr are/were quite similar in their oddities? For instance, Crouch Jnr. does after all have reason to be *annoyed* at Karkaroff (GoF, when the champions are in the back room), and so does Moody, for different reasons. Are the emotions we see in Crouch! Moody therefore meant to reflect Real!Moody's emotions/character/personality? - apologies for the rather longer than expected side note! WG* From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri May 26 23:00:56 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 23:00:56 -0000 Subject: Percy under the influence (Was: Umbridge and Fudge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152959 >> Ffred responded: >>(whatever _did_ happen to Penny) < snip> > Carol: > And what *did* happen to Penny? Maybe she'll be the next victim of the > DEs and Percy will return to his family in abject grief and > mortification? If so, I really hope they'll forgive him! a_svirn: Why do you think anything happened to her at all? Maybe they live happily together in his cosy new apartment. Just because Harry doesn't know the details of Percy's private life doesn't mean that there isn't any. From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 23:02:33 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 23:02:33 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152960 > Betsy Hp: > Actually, Snape does more than bat an eyelash. He conjures a number > of stretchers and carries Harry (and Sirius and Hermione and Ron) > back to Hogwarts and up to the hospital wing. [PoA hardback, > scholastic p.412] > > And while I'm quite sure you'll be able to come up with some reason > to casually dismiss Snape's actions here (duty is a popular one > ), it especially interesting when compared to Sirius's treatment > of the unconsious Snape. > Lanval: I shall try not to disappoint, Betsy! *g* Will get to Sirius later, probably in a separate post. Same for Draco and the Sectumsepra spell. About Snape and the stretchers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we only hear of this from Snape himself, right? Not saying he didn't do it, of course. We'll just have to take his word for it. If anyone else, say, Lupin, had brought the Unconscious Four up to the castle, would you still classify the stretchers as kindness -- or perhaps as a practical decision (because I would imagine stretchers from a magical hospital already to be equipped with a levitating spell of some sort, hence making it much easier to move along, instead of walking while having to maintain a spell on four different people.)? Just a thought. Maybe Snape was being kind and practical at the same time; who knows. Besides, it must have looked pretty impressive, arriving with the stretchers. :) > Betsy Hp: > We've also got the kind and compassionate Snape in "Spinner's End" > when he's doing his best to comfort Narcissa. And there's the > touching (IMO) moment when he saves Draco's life in the girls > bathroom in "Sectumsepra" by singing Draco's wounds shut. Lanval: Spinner's End is indeed interesting. Why, Snape's almost .. cool? As you will have noticed, I tend to think of him more along the lines of Pathetic Meanie, rather than Byronic Hero, but here he has a certain je-ne-sais-quoi... he's a polite host, he serves wine, he's clearly in control (and who can find fault with a man whose home consists mostly of books?) But this chapter also confuses the heck out of me. When I first read it, I thought, right, this is it. Snape is DDM. She'd never reveal this much so early in the book. Then, on my second read, I wasn't so sure. What if she's hiding the truth in plain sight, as it were? He really does seem to care for Narcissa, that's true. However, as long as I can't tell if, how, why, or how much he's lying in this scene -- I can't decide on whether we see a Kind!Snape here. Do get back to me after Book 7 comes out, all right? :) > Betsy Hp: > Because, yes obviously there's a goodness in being kind, > compassionate, polite, etc. For thinking of what others need before > oneself. But we don't have the means to judge any of the characters > on the above (except Harry) because we don't get a peek at their > motivations. (e.g. Is Ron truly being nice when he points Fleur to > the bouillabaisse, or was something else prompting him at that > moment?) Lanval: What do you think? I'd say it was 50% testosterone, 45% desire to impress Fleur, and 5% tender feelings for a girl who likely hasn't eaten all day. Not much kindness here either. > > We *do* see our good guys act in ways that could never be defined as > nice. Hagrid attacking a frightened muggle child because the > child's father has angered him is by no means nice. Hermione > branding a fellow classmate on the face is not a nice act either. > Sirius knocking the unconscious Snape in the head wasn't nice, nor > was he nice when he told Harry he didn't measure up to James. Lanval: But that's why I wrote that not one of the good characters is 100% kind. They ALL do bad things at times. It's the frequency of it that counts for me. Snape's meanness, on the other hand, seems to be his default setting. > From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Fri May 26 20:18:25 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:18:25 EDT Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? Message-ID: <496.e784ab.31a8bc91@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152961 divya_thomas: Personally, I think he deserved what he got for trusting Snape. Snape was evil and everyone knowing the fact he was a death eater did not trust him. And Maybe if there is an unbreakable vow between Snape and Dumbledore, it would have been cancelled the moment he killed Dumbledore and Snape must have planned this all the way. Any Arguments? Clare: I believe you might benefit from re-reading the books. Particularly the overheard conversation between Dumbledore and Snape in which Snape was protesting what he was to be made to do. JKR has established through example that Snape might be nasty but he's not out to harm Harry or anyone else. He attempted to stop Quirrel getting to the trapdoor and got injured by Fluffy. He tried to stop Quirrel killing Harry and got set on fire. He stood between his worst childhood nightmare and the trio to protect them, minutes after one of them had hexed him unconscious. He risked his own safety and freedom to convince the Ministry that Voldemort was back. He risked his position as spy in the Inner Circle by not responding to the call when Pettigrew brought LV back to bodily life. He also didn't harm Harry when Harry tried to chase him down with his own spells. If he was truly evil then getting Dumbledore and Potter in one night, which would have been simple at that moment, would have set him up as LVs permanent golden balls. There is no evidence that Snape is evil and working against the Order. There is a lot of evidence that he is a good guy who gets all the rubbish jobs. Dumbledore got what he deserved? If you were talking about a real person, I don't think I'd be able to respond to that. How horrid. How can any good hearted person deserve to die simply because they see the good in others. Even if you were right, which I do not believe, and Snape was on LVs side - why would someone deserve death for being a poor judge of character? We won't have long to wait to find out but I do believe that Snape is on the side of the Light. How on earth he is going to make this work without a postumous explanation from AD I really don't know but he's a clever chap. smiles, Clare x [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri May 26 23:21:07 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 23:21:07 -0000 Subject: Did Dumbly Deserve what he got? In-Reply-To: <496.e784ab.31a8bc91@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152962 > Alla: > > Oh, and while I think that Snape killed DD because he was saving > > himself, NOT because DD ordered him to do so, I unfortunately don't > > think that Snape planned it all along. > > Carol: > I do absolutely agree that Snape could not have planned to kill DD all > along, given that he didn't know about Draco's plan for getting the > DEs into Hogwarts. The only part I disagree with here is the word > "unfortunately," which I take to mean that you're conceding the point > reluctantly. :-) Alla: I snipped major parts of the agreement and disagreement since we had this conversation so many times, but I just wanted clarify what I meant here. I totally think that Snape COULD have planned to kill DD all along, when I said " unfortunately", it is just my metathinking instinctive feeling based on JKR so refusing to tell about his true loyalties that he did not. I believe that he made an evil choice on the Tower, I believe that he MAYBE did this choice for the right reasons as he saw them, but I don't necessarily believe that he planned the murder all along. I mean, I hope that he did, but what I hope for and what I think is going to happen are not always the same thing. Carol: > At any rate, until Book 7 comes out, I think it's a mistake to assume > that Snape is evil. Tragic, yes. A murderer, yes (unfortunately!). But > ESE! or OFH!? The evidence is not all in, and only Dumbledore, erm, > JKR, knows for certain where Snape's loyalties lie. Until then, all we > can do is examine the canon and see where it leads us, and at this > point it leads me to conclude that he's DDM. > Alla: Hehe. Assumptions won't hurt ever :), but I do agree completely that the evidence is not all in. :) > Clare: > I believe you might benefit from re-reading the books. Particularly the > overheard conversation between Dumbledore and Snape in which Snape was > protesting what he was to be made to do. Alla: Um, Okay, but you see no matter how many times I reread this argument I cannot find there what EXACTLY Snape did not want to do. Here are some possibilities. Snape did not want to watch over Harry anymore. Snape did not want to watch over Draco anymore. Snape did not want to spy anymore. Snape did not want to teach DADA anymore. ALL of them are fair game and none of mine ( or more precisely none of the ones that had been suggested here) proves that Snape is not evil. Clare: > JKR has established through example that Snape might be nasty but he's not > out to harm Harry or anyone else. Alla: No, she really did not established that, since there is at least one person whom Snape harmed permanently, unless you believe in Alive!DD theory. Clare: He stood between his worst childhood nightmare and the > trio to protect them, minutes after one of them had hexed him unconscious. Alla: I think you might benefit from rereading PoA. Clare: He > risked his own safety and freedom to convince the Ministry that Voldemort > was back. He risked his position as spy in the Inner Circle by not responding > to the call when Pettigrew brought LV back to bodily life. He also didn't > harm Harry when Harry tried to chase him down with his own spells. If he was > truly evil then getting Dumbledore and Potter in one night, which would have > been simple at that moment, would have set him up as LVs permanent golden > balls. > > There is no evidence that Snape is evil and working against the Order. > There is a lot of evidence that he is a good guy who gets all the rubbish jobs. Alla: In your opinion there is no evidence of Snape being Evil, in mine - there is PLENTY. But of course to be fair - I do think that those evidence can go both way, but the interpretation that Snape IS evil quite strongly supported by canon, just as there is plenty of support for Snape being DD!M. Of course JKR did it on purpose to make us talk about it endlessly :), but us OFH!Snape or Evil!Snape or LID!Snape or Grey!Snape supporters do have plenty of canon on our side, just as DD!M Snape does. So, to counter all of your examples, I don't have to go that far but to Spinner End. Can it be that Snape lies to Bella through his teeth? Of course it is possible, but it is just as possible that he is telling the truth there and if he DOES tell the truth, it ain't pretty, me thinks. And of course what I just wrote is only my opinion. Alla From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Fri May 26 18:12:33 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 11:12:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: End of Voldemort = End of Evil In-Reply-To: <25708.129.71.218.25.1148661086.squirrel@citymail.citynet.net> Message-ID: <20060526181233.69581.qmail@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152963 BAW : >> I agree with your conclusion that the defeat of Voldemort will not mean the end of evil in the WW. Voldemort himself was preceded by Grindelwald (sp.?) and the Knights of St. Walpurgis; we have met at least one nasty piece of work who is no Death Eater (?Professor? Umbridge). Any fan who thinks that the end of Voldemort will mean the end of evil is totally naive. << Mathias: True BAW, the world is made of balances: good & evil, men & women, pleasure & pain, dark & light. As long as there is goodness in the world there will always be evil. Always a balance, after LV is gone there will be someone else. From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Fri May 26 20:31:27 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:31:27 EDT Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... Message-ID: <3b9.282ddeb.31a8bf9f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152964 Potioncat: I think we have to use 40 as a base. No matter how many students JKR may indicate is in Harry's class, she only created 40. Clare: Actually JKR said that she only created 40 "with backgrounds"! She never stated that 40 was the limit of the intake. There would be far less than 600 pupils in the school if the intake was 40. It is therefore irrational and misleading to base any figures upon the number of students that she created a character/name/purpose for rather than upon a realistic estimate of the intake. She has clearly stated that there are 600 pupils in the school and that there were more than 40 in Harry's year. An estimate is not ridiculous but using a figure we know to be wrong is. Potioncat: My reaction after HBP was that the OWLs were very important to Percy, Hermione and us, to a lesser degree to Ron and Harry, but not at all to JKR. Clare: Perhaps she varied the importance to different people because that reflects real life. I think she showed a realistic attitude across the board. smiles, Clare x From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sat May 27 01:09:24 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 11:09:24 +1000 Subject: School Size/Class Size was Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: <3b9.282ddeb.31a8bf9f@aol.com> Message-ID: <44783364.22895.91F5484@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 152965 On 26 May 2006 at 16:31, ClareWashbrook at aol.com wrote: > > Potioncat: > > I think we have to use 40 as a base. No > matter how many students JKR may indicate is in Harry's class, she > only created 40. > > > Clare: > > Actually JKR said that she only created 40 "with backgrounds"! She never > stated that 40 was the limit of the intake. There would be far less than 600 > pupils in the school if the intake was 40. > > It is therefore irrational and misleading to base any figures upon the > number of students that she created a character/name/purpose for rather than upon > a realistic estimate of the intake. She has clearly stated that there are > 600 pupils in the school and that there were more than 40 in Harry's year. An > estimate is not ridiculous but using a figure we know to be wrong is. Shaun: Well, the trouble is, Clare, we don't know it to be wrong. This is a recurring debate and a lot of it comes down to how much credence you give various sources of information. Personally I think 40 students a year for Harry's year is credible, because that figure can be supported based on internal information in the books. And it's not just because we only see 40 characters with backgrounds - we do have real indications that's there's how many students there are. The following is now a bit out of date - I haven't updated it yet to look at the last two books. But it illustrates the point I am making: Evidence for number of pupils at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Assumptions: (1) Each house has at least approximately the same number of pupils (2) Each year has at least approximately the same number of pupils (3) There is an approximately equal gender balance at pupils >From these it follows that, at least in general terms, each year/house/gender grouping will have approximately the same number of pupils. All page numbers relate to British Bloomsbury editions. Item #1 "At three-thirty that afternoon, Harry, Ron, and the other Gryffindors hurried down the front steps onto the grounds for their first flying lesson. It was a clear, breezy day, and the grass rippled under their feet as they marched down the sloping lawns toward a smooth, flat lawn on the opposite side of the grounds to the forbidden forest, whose trees were swaying darkly in the distance. The Slytherins were already there, and so were twenty broomsticks lying in neat lines on the ground. Harry had heard Fred and George Weasley complain about the school brooms, saying that some of them started to vibrate if you flew too high, or always flew slightly to the left." - Harry Potter and The Philosophers Stone, page 109 This is a joint lesson with Slytherin - therefore the presence of twenty brooms would indicate twenty first year students in Gryffindor and Slytherin combined - or approximately ten per house. Item #2 "But he had no time to dwell on this; Professor McGonagall was moving along the Gryffindor table, handing out course schedules. Harry took his and saw that they had double Herbology with the Hufepuffs first... Professor Sprout was standing behind a trestle bench in the center of the greenhouse. About twenty pairs of different-colored ear muffs were lying on the bench. When Harry had taken his place between Ron and Hermione, she said, "We'll be repotting Mandrakes today. Now, who can tell me the properties of the Mandrake?" To nobody's surprise, Hermione's hand was first into the air." - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, page 70, page 72 Here we have a joint lesson with Hufflepuff - again the presence of twenty pairs of ear muffs would indicate approximately twenty second year students in Gryffindor and Hufflepuff combined, or approximately ten per house. Item #3 "Potions lessons took place in one of the large dungeons. Thursday afternoon's lesson proceeded in the usual way. Twenty cauldrons stood steaming between the wooden desks, on which stood brass scales and jars of ingredients. Snape prowled through the fumes, making waspish remarks about the Gryffindors' work while the Slytherins sniggered appreciatively. Draco Malfoy, who was Snape's favorite student, kept flicking puffer-fish eyes at Ron and Harry, who knew that if they retaliated they would get detention faster than you could say "Unfair."" - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, page 140. Again we have a joint lesson with Slytherin, again we have mention of twenty pieces of apparatus - in this case cauldrons. Further evidence that the combined Gryffindor/Slytherin second year class consists of approximately twenty students - or approximately ten per house. Note - in all three of these examples, we're getting fairly clear information on how many students there are in classes that have two houses in them for a particular year. And in all three examples, involving three of the four houses, the number is twenty - the internal evidence of the books is that it's about ten students per house per year. Not ten developed characters - ten students. Undeveloped characters needs brooms and ear muffs and cauldrons as well (-8 Yes, in interviews, JKR has said the school is larger that this - but she's given at least two sizes I have heard of - 1000 and 600. Her interviews haven't even been consistent on this point. In simple terms, JKR really doesn't seem to pay an awful lot of attention to numbers. And there is a real debate as to whether you give what the author puts in their books more importance - or what they say they meant in an interview. My personal position is I assume the books are correct - and I assume interviews are correct *if* they do not contradict the books. That's just one position. But I think it's supportable. And the books do seem to me to point to 40 per year for a total school size of 280. There's other things to consider as well. Hogwarts seems to have 12 teachers (eventually 13 when Firenze is on staff alongside Trelawney). 12 teachers and 280 students gives us a teacher-student ratio of 1/23. 600 students would make it 1/50. Hogwarts doesn't seem to have the necessary staff to have 600 students really. Not with typical class sizes of 20, anyway. 600 students at 20 per class would require 30 teachers! OK, senior students do have some free periods, so you wouldn't quite need 30 teachers - but it's problematic when we only have 12. 280 students at an average of 20 per class would still need 14 teachers - much closer to the number we actually have and easier to explain by free periods. A school size of 600 is difficult to support by external evidence in the books in my view. 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 OctobersChild48 at aol.com Sat May 27 02:30:30 2006 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 22:30:30 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... Message-ID: <247.b529d4b.31a913c6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152966 In a message dated 5/25/06 2:43:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: > A sad state of affairs, perhaps, but hardly unexpected > considering the total absence of teacher training in the WW. > > This brings up the question of just exactly how someone becomes a teacher in the WW. We know that there are no higher institutes of learning in the WW. It's not like you graduate from Hogwarts and then go on to wizard's college. So what qualifies someone to teach (or be a Healer or any other profession for that matter)? Do you qualify as a teacher because you are particularly gifted in a certain subject (Snape in potions or McGonagall in Transfiguratioin) or because you have practical experience (Lupin as DADA teacher or Hagrid as CoMC)? Hagrid is a perfect example of lack of training. He didn't even graduate from Hogwarts, and in fact only completed three years of education there. We know, because of Harry's interest in it, that there is Auror's training, but exactly how does anyone in the WW pick a career and train for it? Sandy, who has been taken off of moderated status. Just got my owl today. Yippee! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 02:39:12 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 02:39:12 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152967 > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > Actually, Snape does more than bat an eyelash. He conjures a > > number of stretchers and carries Harry (and Sirius and Hermione > > and Ron) back to Hogwarts and up to the hospital wing. [PoA > > hardback, scholastic p.412] > > > >>Lanval: > > About Snape and the stretchers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we > only hear of this from Snape himself, right? > Betsy Hp: No, we, along with Harry, witness it happen. "Snape had regained consciousness. He was conjuring stretchers and lifting the limp forms of Harry, Hermione, and Black onto them. A fourth stretcher, no doubt bearing Ron, was already floating at his side. Then, wand held out in front of him, he moved them away toward the castle." [PoA hardback, scholastic p.412] > >>Lanval: > If anyone else, say, Lupin, had brought the Unconscious Four up to > the castle, would you still classify the stretchers as kindness -- > or perhaps as a practical decision (because I would imagine > stretchers from a magical hospital already to be equipped with a > levitating spell of some sort, hence making it much easier to move > along, instead of walking while having to maintain a spell on four > different people.)? Just a thought. Betsy Hp: With Lupin I'd chalk it up to his usual politeness. Since the text describes Snape as "conjuring" the stretchers, I don't think they're special ones from the hospital wing. I do agree that they're practical, but floating things is the first piece of magic young witches and wizards are taught. There's no reason to presume floating stretchers is easier than floating bodies. But they are more comfortable and safer for the unconscious people. > >>Lanval: > > Besides, it must have looked pretty impressive, arriving with > the stretchers. :) Betsy Hp: I seriously doubt Snape cared about how he looked. He's not Lockhart after all. > >>Lanval: > > As you will have noticed, I tend to think of him more along the > lines of Pathetic Meanie, rather than Byronic Hero, but here he > has a certain je-ne-sais-quoi... he's a polite host, he serves > wine, he's clearly in control (and who can find fault with a man > whose home consists mostly of books?) Betsy Hp: I *loved* seeing Snape at home. I wouldn't call him Byronic, myself (too much logic, too little emotional moor wandering ), but I certainly see him as one of the heroes of the books. (The anti- hero, I guess?) > >>Lanval: > > He really does seem to care for Narcissa, that's true. However, as > long as I can't tell if, how, why, or how much he's lying in this > scene -- I can't decide on whether we see a Kind!Snape here. > Betsy Hp: And there's the rub. We can't be sure of what motivates any of the characters in the books except for Harry. We can only go by what they do. And in this scene Snape *does* act kindly to Narcissa. It appears to be genuine, and Narcissa takes it as such. > >>Betsy Hp: > > We *do* see our good guys act in ways that could never be > > defined as nice. > > > >>Lanval: > But that's why I wrote that not one of the good characters is 100% > kind. They ALL do bad things at times. It's the frequency of it > that counts for me. Snape's meanness, on the other hand, seems to > be his default setting. Betsy Hp: I think "seems" is a key word there. Plus, it's difficult to measure the frequency of the "good characters" actions, because we generally only see them around people they like, for the most part. We are stuck in Harry's POV, so we don't see how Snape interacts with his Slytherins (or in the teacher's lounge for that matter). It's easy to be nice to your friends. It's how you treat those you dislike that can be the real sticking point. Sirius treated an unconscious Snape one way, Snape treated an unconscious Sirius another. Which way struck you as more nice? Betsy Hp From puduhepa98 at aol.com Sat May 27 02:38:27 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 22:38:27 EDT Subject: Defense of DD re Dursleys.. Message-ID: <378.33e3804.31a915a3@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152968 >Lupinlore Dumbledore's reprehensible >failure to intervene at the Dursleys or to prevent Snape's abuse of >Harry cannot be excused on those grounds -- which it often is. "If DD >had restrained the Dursleys the story would be boring." "If DD had >restrained Snape the story would be boring." Nonsense! Such an >excuse is only a cop out, and in no way gets the "epitome of goodness" >out of the hot water his manifold sins of omission have landed him in. Nikkalmati: We are assuming that DD knew what was going on at the Dursley's and I am not sure he did. The Muggle world and the WW are supposed to stay as separate as possible. I am struck when listening to Hagrid in PS/SS how shocked he is to find out Harry does not know anything about Hogwarts or his parents and that he had not been given the letter DD left for him. Apparently, Hagrid and also DD did not have a way of spying on the Dursleys. Harry does not complain to Mrs. Figg when he stays with her. I know the letters from Hogwarts were addressed to Harry in the cupboard under the stairs, in the smallest bedroom etc. but I think the letter were addressed magically. Just as owls can always find the addressee wherever he or she is, the letters were addressed by some magic power and did not indicate that DD knew what was going on at Privit Drive IMO. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 03:00:27 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 03:00:27 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152969 > Betsy Hp: > It's easy to be nice to your friends. It's how you treat those you > dislike that can be the real sticking point. Sirius treated an > unconscious Snape one way, Snape treated an unconscious Sirius > another. Which way struck you as more nice? Alla: Snape conjured stretchers to deliver unconscious Sirius to Dementors. Does it strike me as very kind? Not really, to tell you the truth. It is more Umbridge- style "niceness" - deliver victim to the inquistion with comfort. Personally I think Snape wanted to look good in front of DD, while at the same time telling Fudge that he hopes that DD will not interfere. > Alla wrote: > > > Possibly, but I am hoping it will be called The man who lived again. > > Harry will "die" somehow, but will experience symbolic resurrection > >Wade: > So Dumbledore are you saying Harry will die? Contrary to a well argued opinion presented here earlier this week that he won 't, I must agree with you. Sadly. What is a symbolic resurrection? Alla: LOL. No, I don't think you agree with me then :), because I don't think Harry will die. I think it will look at some point that he is dead, but he will come back ( maybe he will drank "stopper in death") at some point. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 27 03:27:32 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 03:27:32 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... In-Reply-To: <3b9.282ddeb.31a8bf9f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152970 > Clare: > > Actually JKR said that she only created 40 "with backgrounds"! She never > stated that 40 was the limit of the intake. > > Potioncat: No, nor did I. Erm, let me try again. Yes, JKR has indicated some vague number of students in Harry's year. My point was, according to JKR, she then created 40 characters to represent those students. So she pulls from that pool of 40 when she writes about the students in the classes. She put 10 specific students in Potions then added Harry and Ron. So 10/40 made marks high enough to get a place in Potions before Ron and Harry showed up. If you want to say there are really 80 students, then you have to encrease the 10 to 20 in order to keep the proportion correct. or perhaps you have to change the 12 to 24. The posts I'm referring to were discussing what percent of students made certain marks. It wouldn't be accurate to count only the 10 (or 12) known students if you were adding the unknown students to the overall total. I've also read Shaun's post and I agree with what he said. But I know there are several places in the books where there appears to be more than the "Known Characters" in the classes. So I understand your point as well. From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Sat May 27 03:30:54 2006 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 23:30:54 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 Message-ID: <479.1ae42c1.31a921ee@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152971 In a message dated 5/25/06 7:33:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, saberbunny at yahoo.ca writes: > Harry has already killed Quirrell, without splitting his soul, although > that was luck. I think you are confusing your mediums here. In the book Harry did not kill Quirrel. Voldemort did. Sandy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat May 27 03:39:36 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 03:39:36 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152972 > Alla: > > Snape conjured stretchers to deliver unconscious Sirius to Dementors. Potioncat: The Dementors were gone. Snape conjured stretchers to deliver unconscious people to the Hospital Wing. One of them would be delivered to the court system. Snape has every reason at this point to believe Black was guilty. At any rate, he was still a fugitive. Sirius did not conjure a stretcher for an unconscious Snape and in fact, allowed him to receive a few more injuries on the way back toward the grounds. So, if Sirius is a better person for not pretending to be nice, what does that say for Snape when he doesn't pretend? I would say you've found an example of Black, who is good is also not nice. Actually, Black does a pretty good job of not being nice throughout PoA...and OoP too. Sirius and Severus, once again, two sides of the same coin. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 03:54:47 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 03:54:47 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152973 > > Alla: > > > > Snape conjured stretchers to deliver unconscious Sirius to Dementors. > > Potioncat: > The Dementors were gone. Snape conjured stretchers to deliver > unconscious people to the Hospital Wing. One of them would be delivered > to the court system. Snape has every reason at this point to believe > Black was guilty. At any rate, he was still a fugitive. Alla: Snape was delivering Black to Dementors, NOT to court system, not to have a trial. He knew that Black would be kissed pretty much right away, unless I am really misremembering stuff, which is entirely possible. And sure, Snape had every reason to believe that Black was guilty, although I just as Nora does find the refusal of Snape to listen to the modicum of reason from the man begging to hear him out to be delightfully ironic since we know that Snape is on the second chance from Dumbledore himself. Potioncat: > Sirius did not conjure a stretcher for an unconscious Snape and in > fact, allowed him to receive a few more injuries on the way back toward > the grounds. > > So, if Sirius is a better person for not pretending to be nice, what > does that say for Snape when he doesn't pretend? Alla: Actually I did not say that Sirius is a better person for not pretending to be nice. I think they BOTH treated each other in a very bad way. I do take an objection to calling Snape's behaviour here nice though. Potioncat: > I would say you've found an example of Black, who is good is also not > nice. Actually, Black does a pretty good job of not being nice > throughout PoA...and OoP too. Alla: Black just escaped from hell after being there for twelve years. I'd say he has a very good excuse of being not completely sane here. Snape spent twelve years having a normal life, which IMO cannot be compared at all with spending time near dementors. And I'd say that even in PoA the moment Black has a chance to breath freely, sort of, he shows the signs that he does care about people - he gives Ron an owl. I thought it was a VERY kind jesture and the fact that half- crazy ex-convict remembered that he hurt Ron and IMO felt bad about it, that tells me that Sirius still had kindness in him, even after those twelve years. Potioncat: Sirius and Severus, once again, two sides > of the same coin. > Alla: Of course, they are similar in many aspects, they have an ugly past, they can both hold grudges, etc. That I agree with. Alla From Sherry at PebTech.net Sat May 27 04:03:58 2006 From: Sherry at PebTech.net (Sherry) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 04:03:58 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape... In-Reply-To: <247.b529d4b.31a913c6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152974 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, OctobersChild48 at ... wrote: > We know, > because of Harry's interest in it, that there is Auror's training, but exactly > how does anyone in the WW pick a career and train for it? > > Sandy, who has been taken off of moderated status. Just got my owl today. > Yippee! > Congratulations, Sandy! Now, on to speculation on how witches and wizards pick their careers. Heads of the four Houses meet with each fifth-year student in the spring, before the OWLs are given, to discuss the student's career plans or ideas, and how those plans may be affected by OWL scores. For example, Harry told McGonagall (and Umbridge) about his dream of being an Auror during this meeting (OP 29). The subject of career goals arises again at the beginning of the sixth year, because students choose their courses on the basis of what their career goals require. Some careers also require particular OWL and NEWT scores. Unlike our world, the WW evidently does not have formal higher education. Presumably, the guild, department, or organization that manages a particular career field handles further training. I believe that Tonks mentioned training as an "apprentice Auror." JKR seems to have the medieval or early modern pattern of learning rather than the later higher-education pattern in mind. Amontillada From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 04:19:40 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 04:19:40 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152975 Lots of discussion on Snape today! And I've been gone since dawn and just came back! Many of Lanval's concerns have already been addressed by other posters, very well I think...so I'm just getting the tail end of things. Anyway, > Alla: > > Snape was delivering Black to Dementors, NOT to court system, not > to have a trial. He knew that Black would be kissed pretty much > right away, unless I am really misremembering stuff, which is > entirely possible. Leslie41: And what is the alternative? What would Flitwick done? Or anyone else? Black is already been convicted and sentenced. He is the equivalent, in the Wizarding world, of Osama Bin Laden, pretty much. > > And sure, Snape had every reason to believe that Black was guilty, > although I just as Nora does find the refusal of Snape to listen > to the modicum of reason from the man begging to hear him out to > be delightfully ironic since we know that Snape is on the second > chance from Dumbledore himself. Leslie41: Er, remember that Snape, while under the invisibility cloak, had just heard this man "begging to be heard out" state that he wasn't sorry about the prank, and it served Snape right. Um, I might agree with you if Snape had heard Black say "I've been thinking about Snape while I was in Azkaban, and I don't think I treated him very well while we were in school. I'm sorry about that." So, in what universe should Snape, or anyone else be expected to hear Black out after that or give him a "second chance"? The unreasonable Snape hate is understandable, really it is, but it's not LOGICAL when one considers what goes on in the books. > Alla: > > Actually I did not say that Sirius is a better person for not > pretending to be nice. I think they BOTH treated each other in a > very bad way. I do take an > objection to calling Snape's behaviour here nice though. Leslie41: Well, of course you do. Because, as has been pointed out, everything "nice," "good," or "compassionate" that Snape does is explained away somehow as being part of Snape's "duty," and therefore it doesn't count somehow. Geez. > Alla: > > Black just escaped from hell after being there for twelve years. > I'd say he has a very good excuse of being not completely sane > here. Leslie41: Of course he does. You don't like Snape so there's no excuse for what he does. You like Black so you'll make excuses for him. Very human, but again, not logical. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 04:37:51 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 04:37:51 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152976 >> Leslie41: > Er, remember that Snape, while under the invisibility cloak, had > just heard this man "begging to be heard out" state that he wasn't > sorry about the prank, and it served Snape right. > > Um, I might agree with you if Snape had heard Black say "I've been > thinking about Snape while I was in Azkaban, and I don't think I > treated him very well while we were in school. I'm sorry about > that." > > So, in what universe should Snape, or anyone else be expected to > hear Black out after that or give him a "second chance"? Alla: In the same universe where thirteen year old boy, who is completely sure that Black killed his parents decides to hear him out. In the same universe where Dumbledore who is completely sure that Black betrayed the Potters and the order decides to hear him out as well. In the same universe where Dumbledore again gives a second chance a juvenile assassin and with him his FAMILY, where the head of the household is at very least gulty of participation in Graveyard orgy. In THAT universe, IMO. > > Alla: > > > > Black just escaped from hell after being there for twelve years. > > I'd say he has a very good excuse of being not completely sane > > here. > > Leslie41: > Of course he does. You don't like Snape so there's no excuse for > what he does. You like Black so you'll make excuses for him. > > Very human, but again, not logical. > Alla: Oh, I understand, "Ad hominem" is a very handy device, but I would prefer to talk about the merits of my argument. So, let me ask again. Why do you think that when I say that the man who spent twelve years near the creatures who suck all happiness out of the people and who make people go insane has REASONS for being half- insane and not behaving very sane, I am making excuses for him? I mean, really Black was in prison in very unhumane conditions, Snape was in Hogwarts in very normal conditions. He was not stressing himself out, he was not spying yet, as far as we know. Am I making this up? Do you think that they should be held to the same standard of behaviour in PoA? IMO, Alla From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat May 27 05:46:12 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 05:46:12 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes - Power- and Tiara In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152977 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leb2323" wrote: > > leb: > I think that Harry is going to notice the tiara at the wedding and > think it looks familiar but not remember why. It won't be until >he overhears Molly talking about how great aunt whoever-she-was had >it made to be exactly like the own that Rowena Ravenclaw used to >wear that he'll connect it with the one at Hogwarts which is the >horcrux. > Tonks: That is an interesting thought. However, I thought that we had all concluded that the wand in Ollivander's window was a horcruxed item from Ravenclaw along with the possibility that Ollivander was a descendant of Ravenclaw himself? Course we could be wrong, JKR could be leading us astray as usual. But if by chance it is true, what we need is something from Gryffindor. Now I know that Gryffindor was a man and a tiara and Godric don't seem to go together. And maybe they don't. Then again remember the source (JKR), and how she loves to toy with us and do what we don't expect. I wonder about DD's red hair and the Weasley's red hair, and the line of Molly's family. We know that Ginny is the 7th daughter of the 7th daughter. So it would seem that she has a significant role to play in the final book somehow. And I wonder if Molly and DD are related a long way back thus making Ginny a "true Gryffindor". I know that they can't have a strong immediate family connection otherwise DD and Aberforth would come to Christmas dinner at the burrow. I can't prove it, but intuitively I just think that the tiara, Ginny, Gryffindor and DD are somehow all tied together. WG* said: > What if Voldie wanted to hide that/a horcrux? Maybe he didn't have > time or opportunity to go to the CoS (which he obv knew of at the > time), and chose the next best thing - the RoR - concentrating on > a room that where he could *hide* something. Tonks: Yes, now that we know that the vanishing cabinet has been in opperation until Peeves broke it a few years ago, it is very possible that Tom while he was still working at B&B (or even after) may have slipped into the castle and hid one or more of the Horcruxes there. Does make you wonder what all of those items in the room are and who put them there and why. Personally I think it is the Hufflepuff cup that he used the cabinet to hid in Hogwarts somewhere. Tonks_op From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat May 27 06:39:14 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 06:39:14 -0000 Subject: School Size/Class Size was Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: <44783364.22895.91F5484@drednort.alphalink.com.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152978 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: > > On 26 May 2006 at 16:31, ClareWashbrook at ... wrote: > > > > > Potioncat: > > > > I think we have to use 40 as a base. No matter how many > > students JKR may indicate is in Harry's class, she > > only created 40. > > > > > > Clare: > > > > Actually JKR said that she only created 40 "with backgrounds"! > > She never stated that 40 was the limit of the intake. > > Shaun: > ... Personally I think 40 students a year for Harry's year is > credible, because that figure can be supported based on internal > information in the books. And it's not just because we only see > 40 characters with backgrounds - we do have real indications > that's there's how many students there are. > > The following is now a bit out of date - I haven't updated it yet > to look at the last two books. But it illustrates the point I am > making: > > Evidence for number of pupils at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and > Wizardry. > > Assumptions: > > (1) Each house has at least approximately the same number of pupils > (2) Each year has at least approximately the same number of pupils > (3) There is an approximately equal gender balance at pupils > > From these it follows that, at least in general terms, each > year/house/gender grouping will have approximately the same > number of pupils. > > All page numbers relate to British Bloomsbury editions. > > ...edited quote indicating Class Size... > bboyminn: But here is where you are likely mistaken. (1) Each House is probably NOT that same size. (2) Each Year is NOT likely to be the same size. (3) OK, I'll give you this one, gender balance is about equal, but only because the balance of the general UK population is about equal. Perhaps you are biased by having gone to private (in the USA sense) schools that strictly control their enrollment, so they do control the size of House, years, and classes. They control it by limiting enrollment. However, in the USA, Public School Districts take all the student who are available in their district. In this case, class and year size can vary greatly. Sizes shift with the economy, they shift with the birth rate, and other factors come into play. Admittedly, I went to a very small school, but our class sizes varied from 15 to 30 with 20 to 25 being about average. Hogwarts, while it models a private (USA sense) school in the British Boarding School tradition, it does not appear to restrict its enrollment. It is open to every available student in the wizard and muggle-born world. Logically, the various social factors affect the number of available students in any given year, and certainly House size will ebb and flow over time. Next, look at the House personality characteristics. Just guessing, but I would expect Hufflepuff to be the largest, Ravenclaw to be next, followed by a nearly tied Slytherin and Gryffindor. > Shaun continues: > > Yes, in interviews, JKR has said the school is larger that this - > but she's given at least two sizes I have heard of - 1000 and 600. > Her interviews haven't even been consistent on this point. In simple > terms, JKR really doesn't seem to pay an awful lot of attention to > numbers. > > ...edited... > > And the books do seem to me to point to 40 per year for a total > school size of 280. > > ...edited... > > Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought > Shaun Hately bboyminn: JKR has already admitted that the numbers never will add up. Since we know the numbers are flawed, the best we can do is come up with speculative estimations that attempt to explain away the obvious discrepancies. First, I explain the 1,000 number by saying that that is the capacity of the school, not the current enrollment. We have plenty of examples from the books indicating that portions of Hogwarts are not currently in use. So, logically, Hogwarts is not at full enrollment. The 280 number you calculated is definitely flawed, and serves as nothing more than a vague and general estimate. We do have the evidence you gave that Harry's class year can be determined to some extent, but we have no evidence that Harry's class size is typical of the rest of the class years. In fact, I suspect it is on the small side. If we make some reasonable assumptions of variations in year size and House size, it is possible to expand the numbers to roughly 400 to 600, and that's not far from JKR estimate. Since we know from the start that the numbers are flawed, I think that is as close as the numbers will ever be. I also suspect when JKR says 600 students, it is 600 by IMPRESSION, not by count or by hard evidence. The school /seems/ to have about 600 students in it whether those number are varifiable or not. Another set of numbers that will never add up is the number of students extrapolated out into the total UK wizard world population. We have an IMPRESSION of the wizard world; the number of shops, the size of government, the extent of general commerce, newpapers, magazines, and other factors that establish a mental image of the wizard world. However, that mental impression of the wizard world doesn't square with the number of students. The wizard world seems far to big and complex to only yeild that small number of students. In that past, I have estimated the wizard world at 50,000 to 100,000 which is a very small precentage of the total UK population of 60 million. Yet, JKR says there is something in the order of 5,000 to 6,000 wizards and witches in the UK. For the record, the muggle birth rate is approx. 10 births per 1,000 population. Which would mean producing roughly 50 to 60 wizardly children per year. Which, of course, does not add up. So, I flatly do not accept the 280 figure as accurate. Beyond that, I don't think any count will ever be right because JKR based the size of Hogwart on impressions not numbers. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From juli17 at aol.com Sat May 27 06:47:56 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 06:47:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's death, Snape's sacrifice (was Re: Predictions about book 7) In-Reply-To: <447662D9.8050303@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152979 > Eggplant: > > Voldemort will definitely not win of course, but people will be > > debating for a long time if Harry was really victorious and if the > > price he paid was too high. > KJ: > I think this is very true, particularly if my prediction is true and > Harry gives up his life in the cause to destroy the final piece of soul. > I can picture a heart-rending scene where his mother, father, Sirius, > Dumbledore, probably Lupin, and Ginny are all waiting to welcome him > home. Pretty sure Voldemort won't be going there! Julie: I've seen this theory before, that Harry will die and rejoin his loved ones beyond the veil, and I personally can't imagine a worse ending. Or a worse message to send children (who still make up a large number if not a majority of HP readers). It's like saying "Don't bother about this life, the next one's so much better anyway! Especially if you've lost loved ones, you can just join them for a fabulous friend and family reunion! Really, who wants to wait for that anyway?" I know that's not what anyone who's suggested this theory is advocating of course, but I think it could certainly be read that way by children or others who've lost people important to them or who are finding life a struggle for whatever reason. If Harry Potter can escape his suffering, avoid having to live with the loss of so many people he's loved and just get "home" to them that much sooner, why don't I deserve the same? I'm also not disagreeing here with Dumbledore's assertion that death is the next great adventure. That's a great way to look at it. Dumbledore doesn't fear death, which is very admirable, but he doesn't embrace it either. He embraces life, and he makes the very most of *that* great adventure first, gracefully moving on to the next adventure, death, only when there is no other option left. I can only hope Harry is allowed to do the same. He's lived so far with too much pain and sorrow, and with a cloud hanging constantly over his head. If he dies without ever having had the opportunity to embrace life and all it can give him, then he won't be moving on to the *next* adventure, because he won't have experienced the first one. And Harry deserves NOTHING less than that. I can only believe that his parents, Sirius, and the others beyond the veil who love him also want that for him far more than they want him to come "home." So while Lupinlore may toss his HP books in the wood chipper if Snape isn't publically flogged while the citizens of the WW chant "You reprehensible CHILD ABUSER!", for me it would be Harry going beyond the veil permanently as an implied reward for his goodness and courage that would induce me to give away my HP books. (I don't expect JKR will kill off Harry, so really I'm just expressing my opinion here.) KJ also wrote: > > I also think that Snape will not survive. I suspect that his sole > purpose is to see the end of Voldemort, no matter what he has to do to > achieve it. He will throw himself in front of Harry shielding him from > the killing curse and drop his wand at Harry's feet so that Harry has a > wand that will work against Voldemort's wand. This is why it was so > important to place Snape at Voldemort's side when Harry finally comes > before him, and why Ollivander was hidden away where Voldemort could not > find him to change wands. I bet! > Julie: Now this idea I love! I hadn't thought about it in this way before, but it is a good reason for Snape to be with Voldemort when Harry shows up for the final confrontation. It seems all but certain that Snape will sacrifice himself to bring about Voldemort's downfall. Though I'm still not certain Harry will kill Voldemort in a conventional way (with a wand), there could still be another use for Snape's wand. If Voldemort is the one who took Ollivander, forcing him to fashion a new wand, could it be that Snape too could secretly get Ollivander to fashion a second wand, one that Snape would toss to Harry during the final confrontation, one that would create the same wand effect as in GoF, so that Voldemort couldn't kill Harry, *again* (ooh, he'd be so maaad), allowing Harry to vanquish Voldemort in some other way while remaining safe from AKs and the like? Julie, pondering a bit aimlessly in her sleepiness... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 07:04:41 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 07:04:41 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152980 Potioncat: > > The Dementors were gone. Snape conjured stretchers to deliver > > unconscious people to the Hospital Wing. One of them would be > delivered to the court system. Snape has every reason at this point to believe Black was guilty. At any rate, he was still a fugitive. > Alla again: > > Snape was delivering Black to Dementors, NOT to court system, not to > have a trial. He knew that Black would be kissed pretty much right > away, unless I am really misremembering stuff, which is entirely > possible. Now Carol: The dementors are no longer on the grounds, but Snape tells Fudge that he woke up just in time to see them heading back to their positions at the entrances (587). At that point he conjures stretchers, not just for Black, whom he believes to be a murderer, but for three kids who have just hit him with simultaneous Expelliarmus spells and knocked him out. He does not, however, deliver Black to the dementors; he delives him to Fudge, who sends the executioner Macnair to fetch the dementors (587). There are apparently no more dementors on the grounds when Snape conjures the stretchers, but there is certainly a werewolf still at large, and it would be tantamount to murder to leave them lying there. And Snape could have done so, claiming to have been knocked out the whole time. Instead, he takes the kids to safety and Black to Fudge. If Snape knew that Black was innocent, this part of his actions would be unjustifiable. But he was unconscious for that part of the conversation, as well as for Wormtail's return to human form and his escape. So he does his duty to the students, getting them out of harm's way to a place where there cuts can be treated and Ron's broken leg can be healed, and he brings in a man he believes to be an escaped murderer to face the WW's idea of justice. I'm not going to take a stand on whether this action qualifies as nice or compassionate (choose your word), but dementors or no dementors, it would have been a lot *less* nice (or compassionate) to leave three unconscious kids, one of them with a broken leg, on the grounds with a werewolf on the loose. Carol, who had to reread several chapters of PoA to write this post and thinks that maybe we all should do so From greatraven at hotmail.com Sat May 27 08:28:49 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 08:28:49 -0000 Subject: Percy under the influence (Was: Umbridge and Fudge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Randy" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > > > Carol earlier: > > > > > > >noting that Umbridge is Fudge's Senior Undersecretary and Percy > is > > his Junior Assistant, and wondering if Umbridge is also responsible > > for, erm, brainwashing Percy > > > > > Ffred responded: > SNIP > SNIP > > > drinking his morning coffee with them, going for a beer at > lunchtime, > > taking notes at meetings - it would be very hard for a young and > > impressionable man like Percy not to get sucked in to their way of > > thinking. > > > > > > hwyl > > > > > > Ffred (who can't help thinking about the speech by David Owen > back > > in the early 80s when he talked about the "politics of fudge and > mudge") > > > > > > > Carol responds: > SNIP > SNIP > > > Carol, imagining going out for coffee with Umbridge and gagging at > the > > thought > > > > Umbridge is the spitting image of the Assistant Principal of my > former High School. She obviously used her connections in > Government to move up into the Ministry. My mom (rest her soul) > once went toe to toe with her over my being late to register for > classes for my Senior year. I think my mom would have cleaned house > at the Ministry of Magic if she had the chance. Voldemort would > have feared two people if he had met her on a bad day. ;0) > > Randy Sue: Well, at least you didn't have dear Dolores for your boss - I did! I'm here to say that she does exist in real life, even if JKR thinks she invented her. :-) As for Percy, he has always been ambitious - note such events as his stopping at the bokshop to browse a book about former Hogwarts prefects who gained power. I don't honestly think he needed a lot of brainwashing. Yes, what did happen to Penny? Maybe she saw him for what he was and dropped him. > From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Sat May 27 10:34:23 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 06:34:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 In-Reply-To: <479.1ae42c1.31a921ee@aol.com> Message-ID: <20060527103423.96958.qmail@web37206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152982 saberbunny at yahoo.ca writes: > Harry has already killed Quirrell, without splitting his soul, although > that was luck. Sandy: I think you are confusing your mediums here. In the book Harry did not kill Quirrel. Voldemort did. Catherine again: Well to quote Dumbledore, "Voldemort left Quirrel to die". So I guess technically, neither Voldemort or Harry killed him outright. But did Quirrel die because of what Harry did to him, because Voldemort left his body or a combination of both? Harry certainly had a part in his death. Catherine --------------------------------- Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Sat May 27 12:22:38 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 12:22:38 -0000 Subject: How to destroy a horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152983 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "maidne" wrote: > > I just had an idea of Harry gathering up all of the horcruxes and > chucking them one by one at a group of dementors. Sort of like > throwing bread into a flock of seagulls. :p Of course you want to > toss them from a fair distance. (This applies to both dementors and > seagulls.) Amiable Dorsai: I like this, save for a niggling fear that the Dementors might turn the Horcruxes over to their current leader. Harry would want to make the Horcruxes as attractive as possibe to the Dementors, to preclude that possibility. So here's what to do: Harry should get the twins to put together a little ad campaign. Just imagine it.... New Dark Lord Brand Soul Bits! With a crunchy exterior, and a smooth, creamy soul center! Only one seventh the calories! Try our new Dark Curse Flavor! Limited Quantity, Buy Now! Amiable Dorsai From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 27 12:44:32 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 12:44:32 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152984 Leslie: > > So, in what universe should Snape, or anyone else be expected to > > hear Black out after that or give him a "second chance"? > > > Alla: > > In the same universe where thirteen year old boy, who is completely > sure that Black killed his parents decides to hear him out. Pippin: That would be the same universe where Snape turns Sirius over to Dumbledore, not Fudge or the dementors, to let Dumbledore, not Snape, or Fudge or the dementors, decide what to do with him. Snape very humanly hopes that Dumbledore will take his side. Nonetheless he puts the matter in Dumbledore's hands to be decided, not in his own, and not in the hands of three thirteen year old kids. It is bad enough that Harry takes it on his conscience that Pettigrew escaped. How do you think Harry would feel if he'd believed Black and turned out to be wrong about him? Assuming that he even escaped with his life, that is. > > > > Alla: > > > > > > Black just escaped from hell after being there for twelve years. > > > I'd say he has a very good excuse of being not completely sane > > > here. Pippin: Snape went through seven years of inhumane treatment from the Marauders. He's not objective about them. He knows he's not. He isn't the right person to judge whether Sirius is telling the truth. I don't see how he can be faulted for taking himself off the case, as it were. Sirius is presumed guilty by the entire WW including Dumbledore. No one would have faulted Snape if he had turned Sirius over to the dementors, or even 'killed him while he was trying to escape.' He'd have gotten his Order of Merlin either way. I won't argue for compassionate Snape. But I will argue for moral Snape, who thinks that this is a matter for Dumbledore. I can't see that McGonagall or Flitwick would have thought differently, though they probably would have tried to explain that instead of making threats. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat May 27 13:30:49 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 13:30:49 -0000 Subject: Defense of DD re Dursleys.. In-Reply-To: <378.33e3804.31a915a3@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152985 > Nikkalmati: > We are assuming that DD knew what was going on at the Dursley's and I am not > sure he did. The Muggle world and the WW are supposed to stay as separate > as possible. I am struck when listening to Hagrid in PS/SS how shocked he is > to find out Harry does not know anything about Hogwarts or his parents and > that he had not been given the letter DD left for him. Apparently, Hagrid and > also DD did not have a way of spying on the Dursleys. Pippin: That contradicts what Dumbledore and Voldemort say: that Harry has been watched very closely. Now maybe the WW is only watching out for magical interference. But Dumbledore does say that he knew when he left Harry that he was in for dark and difficult times. It would make sense for Dumbledore to keep his knowledge to himself. Hagrid's outrage would doubtless have been shared by many others, and there would have been pressure to remove Harry from what Dumbledore considered to be the only safe place for him. Dumbledore is interested in results not posturing, IMO. He uses disapproval sparingly and threats only as a last resort. Some people (cough*Snape*cough) have more confidence in these methods than he does. But Dumbledore knows that disapproval works only with people who desire your approval, and threats are a weapon that often misfires. Dumbledore may be able to get away with using magic in the Muggle world once in a while, but he can't expect to get away with it all the time. His enemies would love to be able to accuse him of Muggle-baiting. Also, to punish Petunia in any way that would prevent or interfere with her ability to provide a home for Harry would be worse than useless. Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat May 27 13:36:09 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 13:36:09 -0000 Subject: School Size/Class Size was Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152986 > > Steve/bboyminn wrote: > > However, that mental impression of the wizard world doesn't square > with the number of students. The wizard world seems far to big and > complex to only yeild that small number of students. In that past, I > have estimated the wizard world at 50,000 to 100,000 which is a very > small precentage of the total UK population of 60 million. Yet, JKR > says there is something in the order of 5,000 to 6,000 wizards and > witches in the UK. > > For the record, the muggle birth rate is approx. 10 births per 1,000 > population. Which would mean producing roughly 50 to 60 wizardly > children per year. Which, of course, does not add up. > Neri: Actually it does. 10 births per year per 1000 population assumes that married couples are formed *within* the population. However, for a half-blood child, only one of his parents belongs to the Wizarding population. If all wizard children were half-bloods (in the strict sense of one wizard parent and one muggle parent) you could get as much as 20 births per 1000 wizard population, but of course we know that some aren't half-blood so 15 sounds about right. But then we arrive at the biggest unknown, which is the number of muggle-born. They come from outside the wizard community so their number is completely independent of the wizard population size. Moreover, since the reasons for the birth of a wizard child to a muggle family are shred in mystery and probably adhere to the rules of magic as well as RL, there can be great fluctuations from year to year. Thus we would be perfectly within our rights too add each year any number of muggle-born that are needed to get the *right* number of students. I hope this helps . > Steve: > So, I flatly do not accept the 280 figure as accurate. Beyond that, I > don't think any count will ever be right because JKR based the size of > Hogwart on impressions not numbers. > Neri: I fully agree. My strong impression during all the books is that there are much more than 280. Just one example out of many: Harry doesn't know *both* seventh-years Gryffindors Belby and McLaggan when Slughorn introduces them in HBP, and they must have been in Gryffindor house through the five years of Harry being there. I flatly refuse to believe he doesn't know them after five years if there are only 10 Gryffs in his year and about another 10 in the year above him. Neri From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 14:58:35 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 14:58:35 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152987 > > Leslie41: > > Er, remember that Snape, while under the invisibility cloak, had > > just heard this man "begging to be heard out" state that he > > wasn't sorry about the prank, and it served Snape right. > > > > Um, I might agree with you if Snape had heard Black say "I've > > been thinking about Snape while I was in Azkaban, and I don't > > think I treated him very well while we were in school. I'm > > sorry about that." > > > > So, in what universe should Snape, or anyone else be expected to > > hear Black out after that or give him a "second chance"? > > > Alla: > > In the same universe where thirteen year old boy, who is > completely sure that Black killed his parents decides to hear > him out. In the same universe where Dumbledore who is completely > sure that Black betrayed the Potters and the order decides to hear > him out as well. In the same universe where Dumbledore again > gives a second chance a juvenile assassin and with him his FAMILY, > where the head of the household is at very least gulty of > participation in Graveyard orgy. > > In THAT universe, IMO. Leslie41: You are forgetting the intricacies of the situation here, Alla. The legal intricacies, especially, and pretending as if Snape is himself the executioner, and that Snape himself has ultimate power to kill Black or spare him. Remember that even HARRY and DUMBLEDORE don't have that power. Firstly, I think it speaks well of Harry that he hears Black out, but Lupin (a teacher he loves and trusts) is also on Black's side, persuading him. And (a fact you keep ignoring) Snape has just heard Black say that he still hates Snape and thinks the prank against him was deserved. You're analyzing the situation on the basis of what *you* know about Black--that he's innocent. You're not trying to think about what Snape should think based on what he experiences. It's very convenient for you to say that Snape should listen. You know Black is innocent. And what might Snape do even if Snape listened and believed? FREE Sirius Black on his own authority? As has been pointed out, he does not *have* that authority. Even Dumbledore makes no overt attempt to save Black himself, only aids Harry in doing so. Snape does what he's supposed to do. > > > Alla: > > > > > > Black just escaped from hell after being there for twelve > > > years. I'd say he has a very good excuse of being not > > > completely sane here. > > > > Leslie41: > > Of course he does. You don't like Snape so there's no excuse > > for what he does. You like Black so you'll make excuses for him. > > > > Very human, but again, not logical. > > > > Alla: > > Oh, I understand, "Ad hominem" is a very handy device, but I would > prefer to talk about the merits of my argument. It's not an "ad hominem argument to say that you're not being logical. Citing the illogic of another's argument *is* discussing the merits of the argument. > Alla: > So, let me ask again. Why do you think that when I say that the > man who spent twelve years near the creatures who suck all > happiness out of the people and who make people go insane has > REASONS for being half- insane and not behaving very sane, I am > making excuses for him? Leslie41: I'm not saying that he doesn't have reasons. I understand he has reasons. I'm just saying that expecting Snape to FREE Black, or to do anything other than what he does, is ludicrious. The INsanity, at this point, is part and parcel of the fact that any SANE person wants him captured. Remember again that Dumbledore says the *entire wizarding world* believes Snape should be captured. > Alla: > Do you think that they should be held to the same standard of > behaviour in PoA? Leslie41: What I think is that you are suggesting that Snape listen to and then free a person who is from his (and the Wizarding world's) perspective a convicted psychotic murderer. If you come across a convicted psychotic murderer, what you should do is run. If you are capable, what you should do is subdue them and deliver them to the authorities. What you should NOT do is listen to them, and then free them *on your own authotity*. Such actions would get you thrown into jail *yourself*. Understand now? From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat May 27 15:06:11 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 15:06:11 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152988 > > Betsy Hp: > Basically then, you're arguing that all the other students in > Harry's class know more about what's going on at Hogwarts than Harry > does. Neri: Yup. Harry never knows about these things. And Ron, when it comes to academic matters, is nearly as clueless as Harry. And both of them, unlike other students, had much more important things on their minds. I wouldn't put it past them to not read carefully through several additional lines in their book list, or to miss a notice in the Daily Prophet. > Betsy Hp: > With his strong, personal ties with Dumbledore. Neri: When did Dumbledore ever help Harry or even just tip him off regarding any academic matter? Not that he needed to. He obviously counted on McGonagall to take care of these things. And she did. > Betsy Hp: > everyone else in Harry's class got a little note explaining that > NEWT Potions is now excepting "Exceeds Expectations". Perhaps > McGonagall just failed to inform her Gryffindors while sending notes > out to all the other students? > > It seems like an illogical set of conclusions to me. There's a > sweet simplicity in just accepting the fact that only Harry and Ron > do not have Potions textbooks, so therefore only Harry and Ron > failed to make an Outstanding on their Potions OWL. > Neri: No, it's not simple, because then you have to ask yourself what happened with all the rest of the students that got EE in their potions OWL. Like Ron and Harry, they'd be informed in their first day of the year that they *can* take the NEWT class after all. Potions is a prestigious subject and a required NEWT for several high profile jobs, such as Aurors and Healers, and the new potions master is an influential man that has connections, opens a club and knows Gwenog Johns. Logically there would be several other EE students with no textbooks jumping on this golden opportunity, but somehow they never arrive. Why? Perhaps McGonagall and all the other heads of houses just failed to inform them? Or are Harry and Ron the only students in the year that got EE in potions? It doesn't make sense. Much simpler to assume that Ron and Harry just missed some notice that the others didn't. As any teacher knows from experience, grades generally follow something close to a normal distribution. If there are X students with the highest possible grade, there would normally be more students with the next highest grade. JKR seems to be well aware of that: all the grades she reports follow this pattern. DADA: one O (Harry) and three EE (Ron, Hermione, Neville). Potions: one O (Hermione) and two EE (Harry and Ron), etc. So if there were 10 students with potions Outstanding, what happened to the 20 students or so with potions EE? > > Betsy Hp: > Actually, I think there's probably less than 40 students in Harry's > year. Neri: Seeing as this number is canonically flinty canon, I prefer not use it as the basis for any canon reasoning. My reasoning is based on comparing the size of the potions NEWT class to the size of other NEWT classes, and this has nothing to do with the total number of students in Harry's year. IOW, if the potions NEWT class is 12/40 of the students in this year, the DADA class is still 25/40 or more than twice as much. Insert any number you like instead of 40 and this is still true. > > Betsy Hp: > It'd be helpful if we knew what sort of requirement NEWT level DADA > made. We know it's not as stringent as Potions, otherwise Ron and > Hermione wouldn't be in there. > Neri: The potions NEWT requirement during the HBP year is EE. Ron and Hermione and Neville got into the DADA class with EE. Do you see Snape adopting a lower standard than Slughorn and McGonagall for his new class? BTW, it is telling that Hermione achieved only an EE in the DADA OWL. She produces a corporeal patronus, she took down several DEs in battle, and she wouldn't have any trouble with the written part of the exam, I'm sure. And yet she got only an EE. This suggests to me that the exam is really difficult. If you're very good you'll get your EE, but only the best of the best get Outstanding. Would Draco get an Outstanding in Potions? We have five years worth information on him in potions class. Can you point me a single example of him showing any excellence? You know, giving the right answer, getting his potion to be the right color before the other students, helping his friends, any of the things Hermione does five times in any lesson. And no, just being a Slytherin doesn't count, and sucking up to Snape doesn't either. Draco is similar to Harry in this regard. Harry too has never shown any aptitude for potions in five years. If JKR told us in HBP that he got an Outstanding in his potion OWL I would have said it's totally unbelievable. EE yes, if he worked very hard, but not Outstanding. The same is true for Draco. Except for Snape liking him we haven't seen any evidence that he's a potions wiz. > > >>Neri: > > Overall, I get the quite consistent impression that the average > > NEWT class numbers 25-28 students, and the potions class is > > unusually small. > > Betsy Hp: > Of course it is. It's the most elite NEWT course that we've seen. Neri: **************************************************************** HBP, Ch. 22: Ernie was looking rather grumpy; determined to outshine Harry for once, he had most rashly invented his own potion, which had curdled and formed a kind of purple dumpling at the bottom of his cauldron. Malfoy was already packing up, sour-faced; Slughorn had pronounced his Hiccuping Solution merely "passable." **************************************************************** If these are the elite, the WW is in trouble. Neri From estesrandy at yahoo.com Sat May 27 15:18:22 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 15:18:22 -0000 Subject: Why I think Harry Potter is more than a whodunnit (my opinion) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152989 This scene represents my opinions about the hidden lessons being taught to Harry Potter and the rest of us. Harry is feeling pretty low. He sits in McGonagall's new office waiting for her to return and looks at the picture of Dumbledore hanging on the wall. Harry says to himself, "How am I ever going to defeat Voldemort?" Dumbledore looks at Harry and begins to speak. "Harry, your power of Love can help you defeat Voldemort!" Harry replies, "What do I know about Love?" Dumbledore replies "We have been teaching you about Love all along. Everyone you have met has been teaching you something about love. Some teach by their acts of love, and others teach by doing the exact opposite. It's all about our choices." Harry looks puzzled. Dumbledore continues Love is Patient (unlike Sirius Black) Love is Kind (unlike Prof. Umbridge or the Dursleys Love is not Boastful (unlike Prof. Lockhart) Love is not Jealous (unlike Aunt Petunia) Love is not Pompous ( unlike Uncle Vernon) Love is not inflated ( like Aunt Marge) ;0) Love is not rude (unlike Prof. Umbridge or Aunt Marge) Love does not seek its own interest (unlike Prof. Slughorn) Love is not quick Tempered (unlike Uncle Vernon, Prof. Snape, or Sirius Black ) Love does not brood over injury ( unlike Prof. Lupin) Love does not rejoice in Wrong doing (unlike Barty Crouch Jr.) Love rejoices in the Truth (like Hermione) Love bears all things (like Harry Potter) Love believes all things (like Harry Potter) Love hopes all things (like Harry Potter) Love endures all things (like Harry Potter) "It's about our choices, Harry " You don't have to be religious to appreciate these things. Randy From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat May 27 15:28:51 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 15:28:51 -0000 Subject: Harry's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > > Julie: > I've seen this theory before, that Harry will die and rejoin his > loved ones beyond the veil, and I personally can't imagine a worse > ending. Or a worse message to send children (who still make up a > large number if not a majority of HP readers). It's like > saying "Don't bother about this life, the next one's so much better anyway! Especially if you've lost loved ones, you can just join them for a fabulous friend and family reunion! (Snip) If he(Harry) dies without ever having had the opportunity to > embrace life and all it can give him, then he won't be moving on to the *next* adventure, because he won't have experienced the first > one. And Harry deserves NOTHING less than that. I can only believe > that his parents, Sirius, and the others beyond the veil who love him also want that for him far more than they want him to come "home." Tonks: I agree that Harry must live. I know that JKR has set us up all along for the strong possibility that Harry will die. Which, as we all have come to know our author, might well mean that this is the LAST thing that will happen to him. Early on I thought that Harry was a Christ figure and in many ways he still is, but she has said that he is "every boy" which translates to Everyman as others here have being saying that Harry is all along. If he is Everyman then it follows that he must live and live well. (As St. Irenaeus, said "the glory of God is a human being fully alive".) Harry `the boy who lived' should have a long and full life like DD. Yet he is the "chosen one", he has a "saving people thing" both of which are references to a Christ figure. But as I have written before I think that we have a Christ figure in DD and DD has already made the supreme sacrifice. I think it would cheapen DD's death if Harry dies too. So I don't thing that she will go there. I also agree that JKR must think about the message she is sending children and teens. Think about the depressed teens (or adults for that matter) that consider suicide. The last message we want to give to them is that death is the best way out of the pain. (On a side note: I think that when Merope died she did so because she was depressed and thought that, as many depressed people do, that her son would be better off without her. So in her own, twisted by depression, thinking she made a sacrifice for her son.) Who knows maybe Harry will have to live his life with LV within HIM. You know, doing what is right instead what is easy. He will not kill himself to destroy LV, he will learn to bring the out the good, the love within him, day by day, overcoming that tiny bit of LV that still exist within him. That would be a good message too. I have often thought that she might end up with the message that we much each overcome LV within ourselves. This would do it. Or how about this... the spirit of DD in the form of a phoenix comes to be with Harry and helps him, again day by day to overcome LV, not in the world for LV will no longer be in the exterior world, but will be only within Harry. This would fit with what I think the theme of her series is about. Thoughts? Tonks_op From belviso at attglobal.net Sat May 27 16:07:14 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 16:07:14 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152991 > Tonks: We know that Ginny is the 7th daughter of > the 7th daughter. So it would seem that she has a significant role > to play in the final book somehow. And I wonder if Molly and DD are > related a long way back thus making Ginny a "true Gryffindor". I > know that they can't have a strong immediate family connection > otherwise DD and Aberforth would come to Christmas dinner at the > burrow. Magpie: This is a total nitpick but that 7th daughter of a 7th daughter thing (which I know is from JKR, not you) drives me crazy. Ginny is NOT a 7th daughter of a 7th daughter. To be that both she and Molly would both need SIX older sisters. That's what that bit of folklore is about. Regarding the Gryffindor thing, I find something a little fishy about blood not mattering and Ginny being "true Gryffindor" via the blood. Not that it couldn't be true, of course, since we've seen the Slytherin line. Just seems a little more of having one's cake and eating it too. Neri: I fully agree. My strong impression during all the books is that there are much more than 280. Just one example out of many: Harry doesn't know *both* seventh-years Gryffindors Belby and McLaggan when Slughorn introduces them in HBP, and they must have been in Gryffindor house through the five years of Harry being there. I flatly refuse to believe he doesn't know them after five years if there are only 10 Gryffs in his year and about another 10 in the year above him. Magpie: Harry needed to be told the name of a kid he's been taking class with for five years in OotP. I don't think there's anything he couldn't have missed about the other kids in the school. Even if there are more than 280 students it's still ridiculous Harry wouldn't know the names of the kids in his house, imo. Neri: Logically there would be several other EE students with no textbooks jumping on this golden opportunity, but somehow they never arrive. Why? Perhaps McGonagall and all the other heads of houses just failed to inform them? Or are Harry and Ron the only students in the year that got EE in potions? It doesn't make sense. Much simpler to assume that Ron and Harry just missed some notice that the others didn't. Magpie: As far as we know, there just are no other students who decided to take Potions because they got into it. Perhaps it would have made more sense to have a few more students besides Harry and Ron asking for books, but it's not impossible. Perhaps all the other students who really needed Potions made sure to get O's in Snape's class. As odd as that is, it's still far simpler than creating an elaborate announcing system that only Harry and Ron don't know about, especially when they're friends with Hermione the exposition machine and she doesn't know there's a new Potions teacher any more than they do at the feast, nor does she know about any new NEWT requirements, which she would have told them about. It never makes sense to assume Hermione has missed a notice about anything. This is not to say that the rest of the class *must* be OWL students. Perhaps some of them showed up trying to take the class with EEs even without knowing about a change and they got in-- Neville's trying to sign up for NEWT classes he's not qualified for too. So I think it's a reasonable assumption that Harry and Ron are the only EE students, but there's enough wiggle room to say that they aren't. Though if the only reason we're thinking that is so that Snape comes across as less of a teacher, I think that's a lost cause. If he was ultimately ineffective after all his sniping, we'd hear about it. Seems to be the evidence is that he does get results. Neri: Would Draco get an Outstanding in Potions? We have five years worth information on him in potions class. Can you point me a single example of him showing any excellence? You know, giving the right answer, getting his potion to be the right color before the other students, helping his friends, any of the things Hermione does five times in any lesson. Magpie: Yes, I think Draco could easily have gotten an Outstanding in Potions, because getting an O on an OWL does not, as you seem to be suggesting, mean he must have been performing miracles and awing the class, or even that the narrator must be consistently telling us that Draco's doing really well on this or that Potion. It just means he's one of the A students in a demanding class. If Draco had been shown to be having trouble in Potions then yes, I would wonder about him getting an O, and the narrator would no doubt say how that happened. But since Draco has consistently been shown to have no trouble in Potions, which has nothing to do with sucking up to Snape, I see no reason to think he can't have an O. It's not something the narrator needed to foreshadow that much. Neri: **************************************************************** HBP, Ch. 22: Ernie was looking rather grumpy; determined to outshine Harry for once, he had most rashly invented his own potion, which had curdled and formed a kind of purple dumpling at the bottom of his cauldron. Malfoy was already packing up, sour-faced; Slughorn had pronounced his Hiccuping Solution merely "passable." **************************************************************** If these are the elite, the WW is in trouble. Magpie: No it's not. Ernie making the bad decision to create his own Potion to beat Harry and it not working out does not suggest he wasn't an O OWL student. Draco, one of the students Slughorn studiously ignores, making a hiccupping solution does not suggest he's not an OWL student. Actually, they both to me come across as perfectly believable O students in that scene, which is what canon implies that they are to begin with. It's not impossible that either one of them could be an EE, but there's nothing that shows they can't be O's. -m From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat May 27 16:13:02 2006 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 16:13:02 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152992 > Pippin: > That would be the same universe where Snape turns Sirius over to > Dumbledore, not Fudge or the dementors, to let Dumbledore, not > Snape, or Fudge or the dementors, decide what to do with him. > Snape very humanly hopes that Dumbledore will take his side. > Nonetheless he puts the matter in Dumbledore's hands to be > decided, not in his own, and not in the hands of three thirteen > year old kids. > Hickengruendler: But it wasn't Dumbledore's decision at all. Sure, Snape didn't put justice in his own hands, that's true, and I mentioned this several times, because I think it shows that Snape is not as evil as some think. But saying that he gave him to DD isn't exactly true either. Dumbledore had no power to override Fudge's decisions. This is the reason, why Harry and Hermione had to go back in time. Ultimately, Snape handed Sirius not to Dumbledore, but to Fudge. From inspirit at ptd.net Sat May 27 17:07:51 2006 From: inspirit at ptd.net (Kim) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 13:07:51 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's death References: Message-ID: <00ce01c681b0$16bf49a0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 152994 I'm glad that Tonks and Julie (and whoever else above, I'm behind in reading) have given good reasons why Harry must live. The possibility of him dying has been bothering me for a long time. I will never forget the devastation my daughter, now 11, felt when she realized Dumbledore was dead. She put the book down and cried for days and didn't pick up the book for months afterward. If Harry were to die I can't imagine the outcome from his child fans. Indeed, his teen and adult fans too, would be devastated. I remember a long time ago when I was a teenager, Freddie Prinze, who played in "Chico and the Man" shot himself to death. Very soon after a woman/teen? killed herself and asked only that she could be buried next to Prinze. We are not only a bit funny about our pets, we're also a bit funny about the fictional characters we've come to love. The thought that Harry deserves a long and fulfilled life is a very good one. His life has been filled with trials and tribulations from his first birthday on to his present and his future isn't looking like a whole heck of a lot of fun either. He should be given a dozen kids and life in the suburbs if that's what he wants, Ginny by his side. Kim [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Sat May 27 17:15:13 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 17:15:13 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152995 Lanval: > Arthur, Remus, Tonks, Hagrid, to name just a few. They're > all on the right side, so they qualify as 'good', right? > Mind, I don't think for a minute ANY of them is always > nice/kind/polite. But on my personal Gray-Scale of Niceness, > they all score somewhere in the ash/driftwood/pale pewter > range. Snape's more of a charcoal. :) houyhnhnm: I thought we were arguing over whether it is necessary to be nice in order to be good, or whether niceness constitutes goodness in and of itself, or something like that, so the fact that Arthur, Remus, Tonks, and Hagrid are on the right side does not make them good for the purpose of this argument. The question is whether or not their niceness makes them good. I agreed that niceness could be elevated to the level of goodness the way you defined it as "a simple, basic feeling of goodwill towards others -- and likewise a reluctance to hurt others". But I think that the goodwill has to be expressed universally. Betsy HP put her finger on it. "It's easy to be nice to your friends. It's how you treat those you dislike that can be the real sticking point." And I think that kind of niceness has to be supported by acts in order to be good. The problem is that niceness is a mask for so many other things. Nastiness in the case of Umbridge. Moral cowardice in the case of Lupin (which is why I can't see Lupin as good regardless of what side he is on in the war against Voldemort). Mediocrity (I expect we might find some examples among the Hufflepuffs if we knew them better). I would agree that Hagrid is good, according to your definition, from Firenze's point of view, because of "the care he shows all living creatures" except that he doesn't always extend that care to all living creatures if they happen to be Muggles. I don't think he is good just because he is nice to Harry. That seems like mere partisanship to me. I don't know whether or not Tonks is either good or nice. Her self-centeredness, as evidenced by allowing herself to be drawn into a funk over her love life when the future of the WW was at stake, does not bode well for her goodness, IMO. I find it hard to believe that niceness would be a predominant personality trait in those who are drawn toward a career as an auror. I don't think Snape is the least bit nice. I think he is an example of how someone can be good without being nice. His conjuring of stretchers, declining to take revenge on Sirius when he probably could have gotten away with it, turning Sirius over to the MoM rather than taking him straight to the dementors, and shielding the Trio from expulsion, none of it was motivated by nice feelings. He did what he did because it was the right thing to do, and that, in my humble opinion, makes him good. ******************* I read _The Magic Mountain_ *many* years ago as a teenager. I did get it, that Settembrini and Naptha represented opposing tendencies in western culture, and even found their arguments interesting, but I didn't have enough background knowledge at that age to fully enter into it. An awful lot went over my head, I'm sure. I was more interested in whether or not Hans would find True Love with Madame Chauchat. In other words I read Thomas Mann from the POV of a shipper. LOL. I may finally be motivated to reread it, now. And I just had an interesting thought. Will Harry leave the conflicts of the WW behind after his seven year sojourn in the Magic Castle, only to end up as canon fodder in a Muggle war? From ldorman at researchbydesign.com Sat May 27 17:55:51 2006 From: ldorman at researchbydesign.com (kibakianakaya) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 17:55:51 -0000 Subject: Voldie Baby Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 152996 In re-reading the Emerson/Melissa interview of 7/16/05, the following caught my attention. "I feel I could justify every single piece of morbid imagery in those books. The one that I wondered whether I was going to be able to get past the editors was the physical condition of Voldemort before he went into the cauldron, do you remember? He was kind of fetal. I felt an almost visceral distaste for what I had conjured up, but there's a reason it was in there and you will see that." I asked myself, "Self, what is the reason that a fetal Voldemort is so important? Self answered, "Remember the Time room in the Department of Mysteries where there is a vase-like object containing an egg that becomes a bird that becomes an egg again etc. The same room where the Death Eater's head got caught in said vase, and he became a *baby* and back again? What is that Vase thingy? Well, it has the power to make the subject of its powers physically younger and older. But the changes seem to happen in real time. When the Death Eater pulled out of the Vase, his head remained babylike, in the here and now. These two threads of thought came together into the idea that, if the Final Battle occurs in the DoM, Harry may vanquish Voldemort by turning him into a *baby*! I see the following scenario. All Horcruxes have been vanquished. (For purposes of simplicity, I'm assuming that Harry or his scar are not Horcruxes). Harry lures Voldie into the room with the vases, says, Wow, look at that bird, and when Voldie turns to look, pushes him in. OK, probably something more elegant but that's why I'm not writing best selling books. Harry levitates "baby" Tom out. Baby Tom is adopted by the loving Weasley family and gets to make a new start as a mortal with the prospect of being loved this time. Any other ideas about what JKR's reasons for a fetal Voldie were? kibakianakaya From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sat May 27 18:16:31 2006 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (Ffred Clegg) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:16:31 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] School Size/Class Size was Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers References: <1148741462.1051.95697.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001401c681b9$af9a84b0$da096bd5@Billie> No: HPFGUIDX 152997 Neri wrote > Actually it does. 10 births per year per 1000 population assumes that > married couples are formed *within* the population. However, for a > half-blood child, only one of his parents belongs to the Wizarding > population. If all wizard children were half-bloods (in the strict > sense of one wizard parent and one muggle parent) you could get as > much as 20 births per 1000 wizard population, but of course we know > that some aren't half-blood so 15 sounds about right. > > But then we arrive at the biggest unknown, which is the number of > muggle-born. They come from outside the wizard community so their > number is completely independent of the wizard population size. > Moreover, since the reasons for the birth of a wizard child to a > muggle family are shred in mystery and probably adhere to the rules of > magic as well as RL, there can be great fluctuations from year to > year. Thus we would be perfectly within our rights too add each year > any number of muggle-born that are needed to get the *right* number of > students. I hope this helps . The only other thing that we have to factor into any discussion about the proportion of wizard vs muggle-born is acculturation. If there was a large enough proportion of muggle-born children coming into the WW each year, then everyone in the WW would understand Muggle manners, mores, and culture, because they would all (or almost all) have friends, relatives and acquaintances who had come from that milieu. In fact that doesn't happen. The _majority_ of wizarding folk, even someone as cosmopolitan as Arthur, who worked with Muggle matters every day and was fascinated by the subject, really have very little knowledge of the other side. I'd conclude that the number of muggle-borns has to be sufficiently small vis a vis the number of wizard borns to not make a difference to WW culture. hwyl Ffred From joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 12:32:56 2006 From: joegoodwin1067 at yahoo.com (Joe Goodwin) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 05:32:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060527123256.36980.qmail@web61311.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 152998 Leslie41: Er, remember that Snape, while under the invisibility cloak, had just heard this man "begging to be heard out" state that he wasn't sorry about the prank, and it served Snape right. Um, I might agree with you if Snape had heard Black say "I've been thinking about Snape while I was in Azkaban, and I don't think I treated him very well while we were in school. I'm sorry about that." So, in what universe should Snape, or anyone else be expected to hear Black out after that or give him a "second chance"? The unreasonable Snape hate is understandable, really it is, but it's not LOGICAL when one considers what goes on in the books. Joe: Not only is it logical when you consider what has been written in the book but it is what the author intended. Didn't JKR her self say that the "adoration or liking" that some people have for Snape and in particular Draco was a bit disturbing to her? Snape should not be concerned with second chances though he certainly got one. He should be concerned with justice. Considering that he has easy access to Veritaserum and could easily make Sirius drink it, it seems crazy that you wouldn't at least use it given the extraordinary circumstances that had just occured. Leslie41: Well, of course you do. Because, as has been pointed out, everything "nice," "good," or "compassionate" that Snape does is explained away somehow as being part of Snape's "duty," and therefore it doesn't count somehow. Geez. Joe: Or it could be because he doesn't really do anything "nice", "good" or compassionate" Leslie41: Of course he does. You don't like Snape so there's no excuse for what he does. You like Black so you'll make excuses for him. Very human, but again, not logical. Joe: We are supposed to not like Snape and that is pretty easy to see. We are supposed to like or at least feel sorry for Sirius and that is also easy to see. This is reinforced by what JKR has written in the books and what she has said in interviews. So who is not being logical? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 18:31:57 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 18:31:57 -0000 Subject: A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 In-Reply-To: <20060527103423.96958.qmail@web37206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153000 Catherine wrote: > Well to quote Dumbledore, "Voldemort left Quirrel to die". So I guess technically, neither Voldemort or Harry killed him outright. But did Quirrel die because of what Harry did to him, because Voldemort left his body or a combination of both? > Harry certainly had a part in his death. Carol responds: All Harry did was touch Quirrell's face with his hands, which burned Quirrell because Quirrell was trying to kill him. He did not try to choke Quirrell or anything like that, and he certainly didn't crumble him to dust as in the film. In fact, he quickly lost consciousness. Lily's blood protection prevents Voldemort, via Quirrell, from killing Harry, but neither it nor Harry kills Quirrell directly. It's unclear whether the blood protection protects Harry from Quirrell because Quirrell is trying to kill him or because Quirrell is possessed by Voldemort or both. I don't know to what extent Quirrell himself had become evil, but he had certainly allowed Voldemort inside his head and he had killed a unicorn and drunk its blood, so I don't think he's *just* the puppet of Voldemort. (DD says that Quirrell, "full of hatred and greed and ambition, sharing his soul with Voldemort, could not touch [Harry]" because Harry was "marked" by his mother's love.) Regardless of Quirrell's motive, he's intent on murdering Harry and Harry, an eleven-year-old child, fights back in the only way possible, with his bare hands, accidentally discovering that they have the power to burn (not kill) Quirrell and taking advantage of that power to fend him off. Harry is not a murderer or even a soldier in a war here. He's only a child struggling with a man who's about to kill him. If it hadn't been for the blood protection and/or the timely appearance of Dumbledore, who arrives "just in time to pull Quirrell off [Harry]" (SS Am. ed. 297), Harry would have died. And Quirrell himself dies like one of the rats or snakes that Vapormort possessed in Albania when Voldemort leaves Quirrell's body, fleeing "the only one he ever feared." But Quirrell is also a victim of the DADA curse--or jinx, if you will, but considering what it did to Quirrell and Barty Jr. (the actual teacher if not the person who was hired, that's one malicious jinx). I don't know if you were on the list when I posted my infamous DADA curse post, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/137961 but I think that the Quirrell portion may be relevant here: "Carol takes a deep breath and plunges in: Although SS/PS is admittedly vague about Quirrell's death (unlike the film, which makes Harry directly responsible), Voldemort indicates in GoF that Quirrell died when he (Vapormort) left his (Quirrell's) body. This fate corresponds with that of the animals Vapormort possesses. He uses up their life and energy keeping himself alive just as a parasite kills its host. In fact, he is exactly that, a parasite. He has taken what he can from Quirrell and discards him when he is through. "However, I'd like to propose a slightly different twist regarding Quirrell's fate and tie it to that of the other DADA professors. While Quirrell is killed by the mechanism I've described, he is also, like all the other DADA professors, a victim of the DADA jinx (which appears, actually, to be a rather sinister curse considering the grim fates of the DADA teachers we've seen so far). I would even go so far as to say that Quirrell is killed either by the will of Voldemort acting through the DADA curse, or by the curse itself, which seems to have taken on a life or mind of its own. (Mr. Weasley warns us about objects that seem able to think for themselves. What about an abstract entity like a class that destroys everyone who teaches it?) "We first hear of the jinx in SS/PS when Percy tells the new Griffindors about it, also correctly informing us that Snape applies for the DADA course every year (why he would do so knowing that it's jinxed is another question, which I've explored in message 137706). http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/137706 "Percy's information is confirmed in GoF (Snape applying for the post every year) and HBP (the jinx on the position is real, not a rumor spread by students). Moreover, the jinx (or curse) has been placed by Voldemort himself and has been in place since he applied for the position a second time (at a point when he had made some but not all of his Horcruxes). If my math and memory are correct, he's about 35 years old at this time, which would make Snape a child of about three. (Harry, of course, is about eighteen years in the future.) Professor Merrythought has, we presume, long since retired and we don't know who held the position between her retirement, ca. 1945, and the placement of the jinx, ca. 1963. We also don't know what happened to the victims of the jinx in the long years between the placement of the jinx and Harry's arrival at Hogwarts in 1991--except for one. "Young professor Quirrell teaches DADA for what we must assume is one year and then gets the wild idea of pursuing vampires and other Dark creatures in Albania, exactly the place where Vapormort is hiding. Since we know that the jinx is at work and is real, this desire must be its manifestation the first time he teaches the course. It draws him from the seemingly safe haven of Hogwarts right into the not yet visible arms of Voldemort. "Quirrell is gone for a year, during which some unknown teacher bravely or foolishly teaches the course. We don't know what happens to him or her, but the position is again open when Quirrell reapplies (as does Snape, but DD for whatever reason, and I've already presented my views on the subject, chooses Quirrell). This time Quirrell has brought his own doom with him. Somehow (and this is a question I can't explore here but am curious about) he has brought Vapormort back to England with him, perhaps as a deformed infant or concealed inside Nagini. We don't know and it isn't relevant here. "It's important to note, however, that Voldemort is *not yet inside Quirrell's head* when Quirrell is given the position. He looks perfectly normal, if understandably pale and nervous, when he shakes hands with Harry in the Leaky Cauldron. He's introduced as Harry's DADA instructor, so he already has the position. That same day, probably immediately after Hagrid takes the Sorceror's Stone out of the vault, Quirrell tries to rob the same vault and is punished for his failure to steal it by having Voldemort possess him. Next time we see Quirrell, he is wearing the purple turban to disguise the face in the back of his head. The DADA jinx has manifested itself though no one except Snape suspects what Quirrell is concealing. It's only a matter of time (a three-term school year, of course) before Quirrell fails his master again and meets his doom. Voldemort and the curse operate in tandem, whether Voldemort consciously wills it or not, to bring Quirrell down, to utterly and permanently destroy him. His loyalty means nothing to Voldemort, who cares no more about his followers than about his enemies." Carol, noting that Harry doesn't even know that Quirrell is dead until Dumbledore tells him that LV left Quirrell to die (SS 298) From kjones at telus.net Sat May 27 18:57:14 2006 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 11:57:14 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's death In-Reply-To: <00ce01c681b0$16bf49a0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> References: <00ce01c681b0$16bf49a0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: <4478A10A.4020603@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 153001 Kim wrote: > I will never forget the devastation my daughter, now 11, felt when she realized > Dumbledore was dead. She put the book down and cried for days and didn't pick > up the book for months afterward. If Harry were to die I can't imagine the > outcome from his child fans. > Julie: > I've seen this theory before, that Harry will die and rejoin his > loved ones beyond the veil, and I personally can't imagine a worse > ending. Or a worse message to send children (who still make up a > large number if not a majority of HP readers). It's like > saying "Don't bother about this life, the next one's so much better > anyway! Especially if you've lost loved ones, you can just join them > for a fabulous friend and family reunion! Really, who wants to wait > for that anyway?" Tonks: > I also agree that JKR must think about the message she is sending > children and teens. Think about the depressed teens (or adults for > that matter) that consider suicide. The last message we want to give > to them is that death is the best way out of the pain. (On a side > note: I think that when Merope died she did so because she was > depressed and thought that, as many depressed people do, that her son > would be better off without her. So in her own, twisted by depression, > thinking she made a sacrifice for her son.) KJ writes: All of these posts were extremely interesting and, of course, brought up very good points in their rebuttals. I would like to say that I certainly do not advocate for or sympathize with juvenile suicide. As former constable, involved in several, I see this as a prime example of "doing what is easy, not what is right", as did Merope. I also find it interesting that Lily's sacrifice for Harry, DD's sacrifice for the good of the WW , and the possibility of Snape's eventual sacrifice to bring about the downfall of Voldemorte is regarded with approval. I see no difference in Harry coming to the same conclusion and making the same choice. In fact, I see these previous plot lines all converging on this. I don't see Harry making this choice as a way to avoid future life experiences, or as a way to be with his family. I do wonder if JKR has set it up this way to take away some of the sting her readers will feel on Harry's death, and she did say, early in the game before she understood how the books affected people, that she would probably "kill him off". I think that the Mirror of Erised scene will come back to haunt us where we could see that the deepest desire of Harry's heart was to have his family. Of course, it might be interesting to have Harry look in the mirror after book 6 :) I also think that JKR is making a statement that youth are smart enough and capable enough to make these judgments on their own and are equally capable of making difficult and unselfish decisions. My seventeen year old son, with whom I discuss the books, states categorically that Harry is only the central figure of the books as a weapon, not as a hero. He feels that Harry should not have survived as a baby, that he is living on borrowed time, and when his purpose is served, will depart. I was far more shocked at DD's death than he was and suggested that I get a grip. He is a hard-hearted and opinionated little sod. KJ From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 19:07:39 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:07:39 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's death In-Reply-To: <4478A10A.4020603@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153002 > KJ writes: > > All of these posts were extremely interesting and, of course, > brought up very good points in their rebuttals. I would like to say that > I certainly do not advocate for or sympathize with juvenile suicide. As > former constable, involved in several, I see this as a prime example of > "doing what is easy, not what is right", as did Merope. > > I also find it interesting that Lily's sacrifice for Harry, DD's > sacrifice for the good of the WW , and the possibility of Snape's > eventual sacrifice to bring about the downfall of Voldemorte is regarded > with approval. I see no difference in Harry coming to the same > conclusion and making the same choice. In fact, I see these previous > plot lines all converging on this. Alla: I absolutely think that at some point Harry will make a choice to sacrifice himself in the book 7, where we diverge is that I think that at another point of plotline he will be saved somehow either from making the final sacrifice OR during such sacrifice. :) Oh, and the way I look at Lily sacrifice and DD sacrifice is that they made it not just for the good of WW, but for Harry to live eventually. As DD said ( I think it will help you to survive - his lessons, etc - paraphrasing here). That is why I am so very fond of "stopper of death" playing its role in book 7. Alla, who also so wants long and happy "life" for Harry and does disagree with your son that Harry is only useful as a weapon :) Sorry. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 19:38:16 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:38:16 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: <20060527123256.36980.qmail@web61311.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153003 > > Leslie41: > Er, remember that Snape, while under the invisibility cloak, had > just heard this man "begging to be heard out" state that he wasn't > sorry about the prank, and it served Snape right. > > Um, I might agree with you if Snape had heard Black say "I've been > thinking about Snape while I was in Azkaban, and I don't think I > treated him very well while we were in school. I'm sorry about > that." > > So, in what universe should Snape, or anyone else be expected to > hear Black out after that or give him a "second chance"? > > The unreasonable Snape hate is understandable, really it is, but > it's not LOGICAL when one considers what goes on in the books. > > > Joe: > > Not only is it logical when you consider what has been written > > in the book but it is what the author intended. Didn't JKR her > > self say that the "adoration or liking" that some people have > > for Snape and in particular Draco was a bit disturbing to her? Leslie41: Authorial intent is really irrelevant. In many cases, for example, we don't *know* what the author of a novel or poem "intended". As for Rowling, what she "intended" may actually be at odds with what is actually there in what she wrote. This happens all the time with literature. James Joyce himself wasn't necessarily trustworthy when asked to comment on his own characters. In any case, she hasn't truly commented comprehensively yet on what she "intends" re Snape, because of course that would be giving away too much. What she intends right now is to keep us guessing, which we most certainly are!!! What Rowling called into question wasn't the "liking" of Snape per se. And as an aside, I think that even Snape's admirers (of which I am one) don't necessarily "like" him, simply because he's not *likable*. One does not have to like someone one admires. Often, one doesn't even have to like someone one loves. What concerned Rowling was Snape and Draco *lust*. The romantic attraction to the "bad boy," which Rowling thinks is unhealthy. And I agree with her! But that really isn't the issue in this discussion (though it is in another thread). > Joe: > We are supposed to not like Snape and that is pretty easy to see. > We are supposed to like or at least feel sorry for Sirius and that > is also easy to see. This is reinforced by what JKR has written in > the books and what she has said in interviews. > > So who is not being logical? Leslie41: Oh, but as I said, I don't like Snape either. He's not particularly likeable. But I admire him and I think he does the right thing, and I think that he is good. Anyone out there remember who Rowling's favorite author is? Jane Austen. Jane Austen is famous for presenting us with characters that are eminently unlikeable but who end up being noble and good. And characters that are likable who end up being thieving, irresponsible ingrates. Mr. Darcy insults Elizabeth at the beginning of _Pride and Prejudice_, and we are left to think for most of the book that he is nothing more than a proud, unpleasant, judgemental man. He most certainly is not *nice*. It's Wickham that we are supposed to like, Wickham who is nice. It's Wickham who our clever heroine Elizabeth likes and with whom she sympathizes. And it is Wickham, of course, who turns out to be a reprobate of the worst possible sort. By the end Elizabeth discovers that it is Darcy who is the noble man, someone who in all situations tries to do the right thing. She discovers that she has been wrong about him all along. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat May 27 19:48:41 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:48:41 -0000 Subject: School Size/Class Size -- Local Culture - Preserved In-Reply-To: <001401c681b9$af9a84b0$da096bd5@Billie> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153004 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ffred Clegg" wrote: > Ffred: > > The only other thing that we have to factor into any discussion > about the proportion of wizard vs muggle-born is acculturation. > > If there was a large enough proportion of muggle-born children > coming into the WW each year, ...they would all ...have friends, > relatives and acquaintances who had come from that milieu. > > In fact that doesn't happen. The _majority_ of wizarding folk, > even ... Arthur, ..., really have very little knowledge of the > other side. > > I'd conclude that the number of muggle-borns has to be > sufficiently small vis a vis the number of wizard borns to not > make a difference to WW culture. > > hwyl > > Ffred bboyminn: I do agree with you in principle, but I think there are more factors than you are taking into consideration. If I move to England, Scotland, Ireland, or Wales, the process of acculturation begins. In time, if my American family came to visit me, they would find me very changed. I will have, to a small by noticable degree, taken on the language/slang/idioms and culture of the local country. In a sense, I will have incorporated the local culture into my own. Now, if we are talking about Muggles, if an American muggle child moves to Enlgand to go to school, he will bring a certain degree of his American culture with him, and that will influence the kids at the local English school. Partly because the world seems fastinated with all things American. Though in the modern world with Internet and cable TV, world-wide music and movie distribution, 'all things American' are not that hard to come by any more. But Hogwarts is a very different school. JKR was wise when she made muggle electronic devices NOT work at Hogwarts. The imposes a degree of cultural isolation on the school and it's students. Certainly muggle kids can talk about movies, TV, and music, but with no working examples, I would guess those topics would get old very fast. Further, muggle kids, like the Creevey Brothers, are thrust into the infinitely fastinating world of magic at Hogwarts. I think magic, moving photos and portraits, and other fantastic stuff, plus the demands of school work, would be enough to push Jesse McCartney and Hillary Duff out of their minds. So, in a way, Hogwarts imposes a kind of cultural isolation onto muggle kids. Their own hip-hop, hoodie, baggy pants, rock and roll frames of reference are left behind, and they are immersed into the wizard world. The Weasleys are, to some extent, a unique case. Arthur is fastinated by muggle and their world, but he view it from the outside. He views it, in a limited way, like an anthropologist rather than a participant. Being a pureblood, his only functional frame of reference it the somewhat dated, stodgy, and traditional wizard world. So, Arthur's study of the muggle world is like my study of Britain, it's done from the outside, with few direct cultural frames of reference. Now the Weasley kids are less culturally pure, they have no problem dressing in common, but basic rather than trendy or stylish, clothes. Fred and George, as I have always suspected, have no problems wandering down to the local muggle village and chatting up cute girls, who more than likely find the Twins very interesting, but very much out of touch with the modern world. So, the muggle world isn't so foriegn to the Weasley kids, but their frame of reference is certainly dated and unhip. Finally, just west of Charing Cross Road in the vicinity of Shaftesbury Ave, you will find London's Chinatown, an enclave of Chinese culture within the bounds of London's very UN-Chinese England. Here is an example of an integrated society that has also isolated itself from the local culture. Many, exspecially older, Chinese who emigrate to England spend their lives immersed in their own culture by, to the extent possible, living exclusively in Chinatown where everyone shares a common culture and language. I see the Magic world operating very much like Chinatown. They are an isolated culture surrounded by a completel foriegn culture, and they maintain their isolated existance over many many generations. So, in a sense, it's not that hard for one culture to isolate itself in another culture. Of course, it's is not /pure/ isolation; there is always a degree of cross-cultural contamination, but the local dominant culture always overwhelms the broader culture. So, in Chinatown, Chinese culture tends to dominate even as it incorporates aspect of London culture, and while I as an American may move to England, it is much more likely that England will transform me, than for me to transform England. After all that rambling, I guess what I am saying is that given the unique circumstances, I can see how the Wizarding Culture dominates and is preserved even as younger wizards incorporate aspects of the /foriegn/ muggle culture into their society. The Wizard World in general and Hogwart especially are very isolated, and that tend to preserve the local culture. A lot of rambling and a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From celizwh at intergate.com Sat May 27 19:50:27 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:50:27 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/Book 7 predictions and Harry's fate In-Reply-To: <20060527123256.36980.qmail@web61311.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153005 Joe: > Didn't JKR her self say that the "adoration or liking" > that some people have for Snape and in particular Draco > was a bit disturbing to her? houyhnhnm: No, I don't think that's what she said. Here is the quote (from the August, 2004, Edinburgh Book Festival): ************************* Q: Also, will we see more of Snape? A: You always see a lot of Snape, because he is a gift of a character. I hesitate to say that I love him. [Audience member: I do]. You do? This is a very worrying thing. Are you thinking about Alan Rickman or about Snape? [Laughter]. Isn't this life, though? I make this hero?Harry, obviously?and there he is on the screen, the perfect Harry, because Dan is very much as I imagine Harry, but who does every girl under the age of 15 fall in love with? Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy. Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man in the first place. It took me 35 years to learn that, but I am giving you that nugget free, right now, at the beginning of your love lives. ************************* Notice that she is not responding to the questioner but to the audience member who blurted out "I do". It would help if we could see the interview and hear the tone of voice of the audience member, but I'm guessing she must have been a young girl and her declaration of love must have had a self-abnegating tone to it, because Rowling goes on to say that she has created an appropriate object for young girls to have a crush on--Harry--and, instead, every girl /under the age of 15/ falls in love with Draco. So she's saying, IMO, that when *young girls*, for whom *Harry* would be an *appropriate* crush object, fall for Draco or Snape instead, it is disturbing to her. She is not speaking, it seems to me, to readers of any age who merely see Snape as a sympathetic character, or even to mature ladies who find Snape *kinda* sexy. If someone my age had a crush on Harry, that would be really disturbing. Notice also, that she switches very quickly from Snape to Draco, as if to distance herself rapidly from the question of Snape's goodness or badness. She always seems to be evasive when it comes to discussing Snape, possibly because she has a big surprise in store and resolutely refuses to give anything away. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 19:55:41 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:55:41 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153006 > Leslie41: > > You are forgetting the intricacies of the situation here, Alla. The > legal intricacies, especially, and pretending as if Snape is himself > the executioner, and that Snape himself has ultimate power to kill > Black or spare him. > > Remember that even HARRY and DUMBLEDORE don't have that power. > > Firstly, I think it speaks well of Harry that he hears Black out, > but Lupin (a teacher he loves and trusts) is also on Black's side, > persuading him. And (a fact you keep ignoring) Snape has just heard > Black say that he still hates Snape and thinks the prank against him > was deserved. > > You're analyzing the situation on the basis of what *you* know about > Black--that he's innocent. You're not trying to think about what > Snape should think based on what he experiences. It's very > convenient for you to say that Snape should listen. You know Black > is innocent. > > And what might Snape do even if Snape listened and believed? FREE > Sirius Black on his own authority? As has been pointed out, he does > not *have* that authority. Even Dumbledore makes no overt attempt > to save Black himself, only aids Harry in doing so. > > Snape does what he's supposed to do. Alla: No, I am not ignoring the fact that Snape heard Black saying "serves him right", I just think that since not everything is clear on what happened that night, it is also not clear that because of those words Snape should send Black to be Dementors' food. But since you are insisting so much on it, let's examine what ELSE Snape may have heard, shall we? You see, despite the conventional wisdom that Snape enters the stage at this moment of the story, we cannot be sure of it, can't we? "Lupin broke off. There had been a loud creak behind him. The bedroom door had opened of its own accord. All five of them stared at it" - PoA, p.352 Snape can move without any noise, so it is perfectly reasonable that he was standing here for a while and the door opened of its own accord as it states, IMO. So, if Snape was standing here for a while, what else can he hear? For example he may have heard Sirius claims of Peter's guilt. He may also have heard Remus' assumption that the secret keepers were switched. That all depends of course on when Snape entered, but I'd say that we don't know for sure when he entered the stage. But if he heard all of that, um, yes, I'd say he had an obligation to not feed Sirius and Lupin to dementors at least. Let's also not forget that per dear Severus words he loked at the map himself and since Remus saw Pettigrew on the map, isn't it possible that Snape saw him too? Should that at least make him a little bit suspicious and I don't know, check with Dumbledore first of all? I don't know, bring DD with him, maybe. That is of course if he is concerned with doing the "right" thing. JMO, Alla From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 20:20:50 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 20:20:50 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153007 > > houyhnhnm: > > I thought we were arguing over whether it is necessary to be nice in > order to be good, or whether niceness constitutes goodness in and of > itself, or something like that, so the fact that Arthur, Remus, Tonks, > and Hagrid are on the right side does not make them good for the > purpose of this argument. The question is whether or not their > niceness makes them good. Lanval: Oh no, you misunderstood me then. My argument was that niceness/kindness cannot simply be ignored, or looked at with contempt, when judging a characters 'goodness'. Let me try again. Character A works for the side of good, but is a generally nasty, disagreeable person. He tends to hurt others by his attitude. Character B also works for the side of good, but is generally a friendly and kind person. He rarely hurts others by his attitude. What I take exception to is this claim: that Character A not only deserves to be called as 'good' as Character B, but that A is actually superior, because B's niceness and kindness are a waste of time, and/or a sign of insincerity. And now there seems to be another claim, namely that Character A deserves higher praise, because as a nasty person, it's so much harder for him to be 'good'...? Sorry, but no. > houyhnhnm: > I agreed that niceness could be elevated to the level of goodness the > way you defined it as "a simple, basic feeling of goodwill towards > others -- and likewise a reluctance to hurt others". But I think that > the goodwill has to be expressed universally. Lanval: No. It doesn't have to be. It would be a fine thing, if people were able to treat everyone with equal kindliness, but it's unrealistic. > houyhnhnm: > The problem is that niceness is a mask for so many other things. > Nastiness in the case of Umbridge. Moral cowardice in the case of > Lupin (which is why I can't see Lupin as good regardless of what side > he is on in the war against Voldemort). Lanval: And here we are again... Snape gets a pass for everything he's ever done, from possible murder and torture, to his general nastiness to everyone, all because he *may* be fighting on the right side, but Lupin cannot ever be called good? > houyhnhnm: Mediocrity (I expect we might > find some examples among the Hufflepuffs if we knew them better). > > I would agree that Hagrid is good, according to your definition, from > Firenze's point of view, because of "the care he shows all living > creatures" except that he doesn't always extend that care to all > living creatures if they happen to be Muggles. I don't think he is > good just because he is nice to Harry. That seems like mere > partisanship to me. > > I don't know whether or not Tonks is either good or nice. Her > self-centeredness, as evidenced by allowing herself to be drawn into a > funk over her love life when the future of the WW was at stake, does > not bode well for her goodness, IMO. Lanval: Great! Then forget Snape. If Tonks must be judged, and found wanting, on grounds of self-centeredness, then Mr Self-Centered himself clearly loses all claim to goodness. We're talking about the guy who viciously attacks the Promised One, the Boy Who Lived, the Hope of the WW, on their first encounter, for nothing but petty personal reasons. > houyhnhnm: > I don't think Snape is the least bit nice. I think he is an example > of how someone can be good without being nice. His conjuring of > stretchers, declining to take revenge on Sirius when he probably could > have gotten away with it, turning Sirius over to the MoM rather than > taking him straight to the dementors, and shielding the Trio from > expulsion, none of it was motivated by nice feelings. He did what he > did because it was the right thing to do, and that, in my humble > opinion, makes him good. Lanval: See, I just don't understand this. You doubt whether Hagrid or Tonks deserve to even be called kind, much less good, because of their respective flaws, but when it comes to Severus Snape, there's no question about it ? The mere fact that he put some people on stretchers deserves praise? I'm not saying that Snape cannot be 'Good', I'm saying that he should not be praised to high heaven for acts that, in other characters, would be considered nothing more than common decency. > ******************* > > I read _The Magic Mountain_ *many* years ago as a teenager. I did get > it, that Settembrini and Naptha represented opposing tendencies in > western culture, and even found their arguments interesting, but I > didn't have enough background knowledge at that age to fully enter > into it. An awful lot went over my head, I'm sure. I was more > interested in whether or not Hans would find True Love with Madame > Chauchat. In other words I read Thomas Mann from the POV of a > shipper. LOL. Lanval: So did I, the first time. *g* But I must have tackled it at least ten times since, often just in parts, and there's always something I've overlooked before. > I may finally be motivated to reread it, now. And I just had an > interesting thought. Will Harry leave the conflicts of the WW behind > after his seven year sojourn in the Magic Castle, only to end up as > canon fodder in a Muggle war? Lanval: :) If he did, things might get rather interesting. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Sat May 27 17:54:44 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 17:54:44 -0000 Subject: Harry's death In-Reply-To: <00ce01c681b0$16bf49a0$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153008 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kim" wrote: > > The thought that Harry deserves a long and fulfilled life is a very good one. His life has been filled with trials and tribulations from his first birthday on to his present and his future isn't looking like a whole heck of a lot of fun either. > > He should be given a dozen kids and life in the suburbs if that's what he wants, Ginny by his side. > Najwa: I do agree that he should live and that it would definitely be a huge heartbreak and let down if she decides to let him die, even if it weren't a horrible death, or just beyond the veil. However, she's made her money, she's gotten everyone where she wants them, I tend to wonder if it matters to her as long as the story gets told the way she has pictured it since the beginning. I do know that she was once in correspondence with a terminally ill child who was a big fan of hers, so perhaps for the sake of that child and many like her, she will let Harry live a good life and give them hope. To me, if he is a horcrux, and with all that has been going on in his life, it is as if he is in his own way a child that doesn't have a long life promised to him. Perhaps if she leaves him alive, he can show everyone, especially those who have lost hope, that hope in itself can help a person overcome even the most horrible of cards that life has to deal them. Bravery of course helps that, as well as courage. Let's just keep our fingers crossed, not just for our own little hope in Harry, but our hope in life all together. In this day and age, we do need more happy endings, because they seem so few and far between lately. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 21:08:21 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 21:08:21 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Umbridge (long) (Was: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153009 Lanval wrote: > > I don't think Dolores Umbridge the Person matters at all, to JKR or the story. I see her as an allegory. For instance, in Thomas Mann's "The Magic Mountain", the character of Lodovico Settembrini represents Humanism, while his constant sparring partner Leo Naphta represents what might be called Religious Radicalism. To me, Umbrigde represents Fascism/Totalitarianism, in all its creeping menace, made all the more dangerous because of the banality of her appearance. Every child knows that when one encounters a monstrous slitty- nostrilled, red-eyed, madly cackling chap in a graveyard, it's time to be Very Afraid. But Umbridge, who looks "like someone's maiden aunt"? Who collects pictures of kittens? > > I grit my teeth every time I read one of her decrees. > > We see the very worst of her before we even encounter her as a character. Then we perk up a little at Hermione's unease at the introductory speech. And then it begins, slowly, but surely, a little freedom taken away here, a new rule in effect there. Soon it's too late. Umbridge has too much power, And then, once she's in total control, open revolution is the only way. > > Not sure if JKR intended this story arc as a Lesson to Remember. But > if she did, she did it brilliantly, IMO. Carol responds: While I agree that there's a lesson here and that Umbridge is an allegorical figure never intended as a two-dimensional character, let me get one small disagreement out of the way before I present my own half-formed thoughts on the subject. Harry thinks she looks like "someone's maiden aunt" until he sees her from the front and recognizes her as the witch from his hearing, someone who clearly wanted him to be convicted of underage magic. And even before he knew where she stood with regard to his own personal education and welfare, he thought that she looked like a toad with a fly (the silly little bow) unwisely perched on her head. He expects her to speak in a croak, and the sweet little girl voice, like the polite little "hem! hem!" signals fake niceness from the first. Granted, she's not meant to be a terrifying figure like the slit-nosed monster Voldemort, but she's certainly meant to be revolting from the start. The pink cardigan and "Alice band" and kittens are all part of a little-girl image that contrasts absurdly with her pouchy eyes and wide toadlike mouth with little pointy teeth. (A toad with teeth?) The absurd contrast between her appearance and behavior verges on the comic, like the caricatures of politicians in political cartoons, and yet it's never truly comic because we know from the first that she's out to get Harry. (I suspect, as I said in another post, that she's manipulated Fudge into viewing both him and DD as dangerous to the MoM, but I've already stated my views on that topic.) We next see her at Hogwarts, giving a speech full of "waffle" with "important stuff" hidden in it: "Progress for progress's sake should be discouraged" and whatever is undesirable in the curriculum is to be "pruned." Hermione arrives immediately at the correct conclusion: "The Ministry is interfering at Hogwarts." We've already seen JKR making digs at politics and bureaucracy via Fudge (who is nevertheless, IMO, a more human and sympathetic character than Umbridge, however weak and foolish and easily manipulated he may be. I rather liked him in "The Other Minister," where he's forced to concede that he's been deluded). But something more is going on here: not politics as usual in the WW but politics entering the educational system, bureaucratic control of the curriculum. Umbridge (rhetorically) asks Hermione is she's a "Ministry-trained educational expert" (OoP Am. ed. 242), implying that she herself is such an "expert." I'm not British, so I'm not on solid ground here, but I wonder whether JKR, who took some sort of course in teacher training before teaching French in Scotland, is covertly critiquing either the state-controlled British school system or the educational theory that passes for teacher training in some places. (I could talk about my own "training" to teach when I received my B.S. in Ed. back in the 1970s, but that's ancient history and I'm an American. IMHO, matters have become even worse here--sixth graders of my acquaintance can barely read and think that Afghanistan is in South America--but I'm more interested in whether there's a connection with trends in British education. Before I continue along this line, looking at Umbridge herself in the classroom, let me note that she reminds me of two diametrically opposed characters from literature, Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor, who believed that the mass of people could not think for themselves and had to be led and cared for like sheep (anyone who tried to persuade them to think for themselves was a troublemaker who had to be killed for the public good--Harry's detentions, anyone?) and Dickens's Wackford Squeers, the sadistic schoolmaster who "teaches" the boys at Dotheboys Hall by providing them with useless and inaccurate information and beating or starving them into submission. The Grand Inquisitor believes that he's acting for the good of the common people by maintaining their ignorance and dependence on him and others like him; Squeers is a caricature of a schoolmaster whose name and appearance are darkly comic, as Umbridge's are, who sadistically abuses his pupils for his own advantage without giving them the education their parents or guardians are paying for. (Obviously there are differences here, but Dickens is satirizing a certain type of school that really existed in his time in the hope of calling public attention to the abuse, and I'm wondering if JKR is doing something similar with Umbridge.) If anyone is interested in following up the High Inquisitor/Grand Inquisitor parallel (surely the name of her office suggests a connection?), the Grand Inquisitor dream scene from "The Brothers Karamazov" can be read here: http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/philosophy/existentialism/dostoevsky/grand.html and an analysis pointing out its key elements can be read here: http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/philosophy/existentialism/dostoevsky/grand-analysis.html To return to canon, Umbridge treats the students as if they were kindergarten children, saying in her opening speech how happy she is to see their "happy little faces," making them say "Good afternoon, Professor Umbridge," suppressing discussion, and punishing dissenting opinions with detention. (I'm surprised that Hermione didn't at least have points docked for her criticism of the text; Harry's detentions, however, relate to the more important issue of contradicting the official Ministry doctrine that Voldemort has returned. Such "lies" must be punished, and cruelly.) And there's the whole matter of teaching defensive *theory* instead of practical defense. Not only does the textbook, "Defensive Magical *Theory*" by Wilbert *Slinkhard*) contain no practical information on casting spells, Umbridge has the students read it in class (surely they should read the books outside class and at least discuss what they've read?) In marked contrast to Snape in HBP, she tells them to put "wands away" and tells Hermione that she "can't imagine any situation arising in her classroom that would require [students] to *use* a defensive spell" (242). Obviously such a class (in contrast to Snape's) is worse than useless in preparing students to confront Voldemort and the Death Eaters, and is intended to perpetuate the official Ministry position that LV is not returning. But I'm wondering is it's also a caricature of educational theory, or theory in general. The textbook is as boring as Professor Binns' lectures; the words slide through Harry's brain without making any impression (240). The three goals of the class, which remind me of the "behavioral objectives" I was supposed to formulate in creating a lesson plan back in those useless education classes I took in the 70s, reveal the uselessness of the theory they're learning, particularly the third one: "Placing the use of defensive magic in a context for practical use" (340). "Placing "use" in a context for "use"? What? Come again? Do these words mean anything, or are they just a circular waffle? (Which reminds me of the title and author of one of the first-year textbooks, "Magical Theory" by Adalbert *Waffling*.) So: allegory, caricature, satire, attacks on bureaucracy and the type of "education" (indoctrination) that expects students to be attentive little children passively absorbing approved theories and principles, possible connections to Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor who wants to relieve the masses of responsibility so that they can remain happily ignorant and punishes (kills) troublemakers who raise doubts in their minds. What does it all mean? Does the depiction of Umbridge have any relevance to educational trends in the UK or the "dumbing down" of education? Surely it's more than a plot device to get a bureaucrat into Hogwarts to thwart the students' practical training in DADA and usurp control through her increasingly invasive decrees. Or are we just supposed to hate her because she's mean to Harry? Carol, hoping that someone will respond given the length of time she's spent composing this post! From empress.najwa at gmail.com Sat May 27 15:56:15 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 15:56:15 -0000 Subject: How to destroy a horcrux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153010 "maidne" wrote: > > I just had an idea of Harry gathering up all of the horcruxes and > > chucking them one by one at a group of dementors. Sort of like > > throwing bread into a flock of seagulls. :p > > Amiable Dorsai: > I like this, save for a niggling fear that the Dementors might turn > the Horcruxes over to their current leader. Harry would want to make > the Horcruxes as attractive as possibe to the Dementors, to preclude > that possibility. > > So here's what to do: Harry should get the twins to put together a > little ad campaign. Just imagine it.... > > New Dark Lord Brand Soul Bits! > > With a crunchy exterior, and a smooth, creamy soul center! > > Only one seventh the calories! > > Try our new Dark Curse Flavor! > > Limited Quantity, Buy Now! Najwa: I'll take three please. Oh wait, I'm not the targetted consumer. That is an interesting way of dealing with it, or just some how let Harry wear the tiara, and the original locket, and whatever else is left (considering he might not need to wear anything else since he might be the Horcrux) and just march up to a hungry dementor and aim these trinkets at the thing's mouthhole to avoid anymore trouble. I'd suggest that he leave promptly afterwards, because I wouldn't want the Dementors to leave a nasty mess and Harry have to clean that up. Who knows how digested Voldie soul fragments effect the stomach. From foodiedb at optonline.net Sat May 27 17:18:29 2006 From: foodiedb at optonline.net (David) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 17:18:29 -0000 Subject: Horcruxes -live or inanimate? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153011 Hi all, do horcruxes have to be made of an inanimate object? Or, could they be a whole person? For example, maybe what Neville forgot was that he is a horcrux? David From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 21:36:55 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 21:36:55 -0000 Subject: School Size/Class Size was Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153012 Neri wrote: > My strong impression during all the books is that there are much more than 280 [students]. Just one example out of many: Harry doesn't know *both* seventh-years Gryffindors Belby and McLaggan when Slughorn introduces them in HBP, and they must have been in Gryffindor house through the five years of Harry being there. I flatly refuse to believe he doesn't know them after five years if there are only 10 Gryffs in his year and about another 10 in the year above him. Carol: Marcus Belby is in Ravenclaw, as Blaise Zabini informs Draco in "the Slug Club" (HBP Am. ed. 150). But I agree that even unobservant Harry should know who Cormac McLaggen is after five years of sharing a common room with him: McLaggen is not exactly inconspicuous in either his size or his behavior. (However, he's primarily a plot device whose existence is irrelevant to Harry before HBP, so maybe JKR is to blame for Harry's obliviousness here.) You're right that we have no reason to assume that other classes are the same size as Harry's, but the in-text evidence already cited (brooms, cauldrons, earmuffs, etc.) supports a class size of 40 for Harry's year. And it's Harry's class that matters if we're determining what percentage of students kids received O's on their Potions OWLs. Carol, who also finds it difficult to believe that Harry doesn't know Theodore Nott's name after more than four years of Potions and two years of CoMC with him and can only imagine that Theo never speaks up in either class! From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 21:48:18 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 21:48:18 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153013 > Betsy Hp: > No, we, along with Harry, witness it happen. > > "Snape had regained consciousness. He was conjuring stretchers and > lifting the limp forms of Harry, Hermione, and Black onto them. A > fourth stretcher, no doubt bearing Ron, was already floating at his > side. Then, wand held out in front of him, he moved them away > toward the castle." [PoA hardback, scholastic p.412] Ah yes, in the time turner episode. Thanks. I DO need to dig out my copy of PoA. :) > > Betsy Hp: > I seriously doubt Snape cared about how he looked. He's not > Lockhart after all. Lanval: Actually, they both seem to crave admiration. It's no coincidence IMO that one of the memories Harry sees during the Occlumency lessons is a girl laughing at a boy on a bucking broom, that Lupin mentions how hard the loss of the Order of Merlin hit Snape, that Snape always insists on being called 'sir', and so on. To Snape the world is a Bad Place, because it has always refused to properly recognize Severus Snape, Super Genius. > Betsy Hp: > And there's the rub. We can't be sure of what motivates any of the > characters in the books except for Harry. We can only go by what > they do. And in this scene Snape *does* act kindly to Narcissa. It > appears to be genuine, and Narcissa takes it as such. Lanval: Well, just to be evil here *g*... but according to what has been mentioned in this discussion, Snape being genuinely nice to Narcissa doesn't count anymore than Sirius being nice to Harry, or Hagrid being nice to the Trio. Too easy. Just partisanship. > It's easy to be nice to your friends. It's how you treat those you > dislike that can be the real sticking point. Sirius treated an > unconscious Snape one way, Snape treated an unconscious Sirius > another. Which way struck you as more nice? > Lanval: If things are taken out of context, Snape. If we however take into consideration that only minutes before Sirius allows Snape's head to meet with some dirt, Snape tried to have him killed... And again, when Snape gets a stretcher for Sirius, it's to take him to the castle, where he will be handed over to Fudge, who will call the dementors. All of which Snape knows. Not only does he get his wish (Sirius dead), it's even better than that: Sirius 'worse' than dead', without Snape so much as having to lift a finger, and without the decided inconvenience of Snape having to cast an unforgivable AK. Sheesh. Now that I think about it, it would have been easier for me to swallow if Snape HAD dragged Sirius by his hair to the castle. There seems to be an added creepiness here, in making the last voyage of the prisoner a comfortable one... From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 22:09:21 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 22:09:21 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153014 > >>Betsy Hp: > > Basically then, you're arguing that all the other students in > > Harry's class know more about what's going on at Hogwarts than > > Harry does. > >>Neri: > Yup. Harry never knows about these things. > Betsy Hp: Really? I'd love some sort of canon on that. Because I don't recall a time where some massive change occured at Hogwarts and Harry was clueless, Ron was clueless, and even more importantly, *Hermione* was clueless, but all the other Hogwarts students of their class knew exactly what was going on. > >>Betsy Hp: > > > > There's a sweet simplicity in just accepting the fact that only > > Harry and Ron do not have Potions textbooks, so therefore only > > Harry and Ron failed to make an Outstanding on their Potions OWL. > >>Neri: > No, it's not simple, because then you have to ask yourself what > happened with all the rest of the students that got EE in their > potions OWL. > Betsy Hp: They simply didn't want to take potions. When going over their career choices with their heads of house, they realized that they probably weren't going to pull an Outstanding and so looked to another career. > >>Neri: > Potions is a prestigious subject and a required NEWT for several > high profile jobs, such as Aurors and Healers... Yes, being an Auror sounds cool, but I don't recall Fake!Moody being flocked by excited fan boys and girls *dying* to find out how they could possibly become Aurors. Actually, most of the student body seemed rather put off by Fake!Moody. As to being a Healer, I'm not sure it really is that high profile of a job. At least, we haven't seen any wizarding parents pressuring their children to be Healers when they grow up. What we *have* seen is pressure to join the Ministry, and we've seen that this is where ambitious characters tend to go, or get told to go. Potions isn't a requirement in this case. > >>Neri: > ...and the new potions master is an influential man that has > connections, opens a club and knows Gwenog Johns. > Betsy Hp: Again, I don't recall Slughorn surrounded by students all eager to get into his "club". Though, this does raise an interesting idea: Perhaps Slughorn was disappointed to find out the young Harry hadn't qualified for NEWT Potions, so he dropped a little bug in McGonagall's ear... Speculation is fun, but it is just speculation. If JKR wanted to show Snape as a dismal failure as a teacher, I doubt she'd have left it up to readers to make up informational columns in the WW's newspaper that Hermione chooses to ignore. > >>Betsy Hp: > > Actually, I think there's probably less than 40 students in > > Harry's year. > >>Neri: > Seeing as this number is canonically flinty canon, I prefer not > use it as the basis for any canon reasoning. > Betsy Hp: The actual number of students in Harry's class isn't really Flinty, IMO. *Everything* in canon supports the number being around 40 total. It's everywhere else that the number starts to fall down, Hogwarts being the only wizarding school, etc. So yeah, if you're looking at the wizarding popluation as a whole, it gets a bit hinky. But to try and suggest that there are all these secret students running around that *never* get mentioned in canon, it looks more like borrowing trouble and fighting the text than the text behaving inconsistently. (IMO, the best way to handle the population issue is to assume that Harry's class is unusually small. Which, considering the state of the WW at the time of his birth, isn't that odd, actually.) > >>Neri: > My reasoning is based on comparing the size of the potions NEWT > class to the size of other NEWT classes, and this has nothing to > do with the total number of students in Harry's year. IOW, if the > potions NEWT class is 12/40 of the students in this year, the DADA > class is still 25/40 or more than twice as much. Insert any number > you like instead of 40 and this is still true. Betsy Hp: Oh that definitly works. But you're ignoring the lower requirements for getting into DADA. Potions is a more elite NEWT. > >>Neri: > The potions NEWT requirement during the HBP year is EE. Ron and > Hermione and Neville got into the DADA class with EE. Do you see > Snape adopting a lower standard than Slughorn and McGonagall for > his new class? > Betsy Hp: Yes. It's wand waving, isn't it? Snape has always stated that Potions is harder than other subjects, so it would be consistent to his character and to the subjects as they've been explained to us. > >>Neri: > Would Draco get an Outstanding in Potions? We have five years worth > information on him in potions class. Can you point me a single > example of him showing any excellence? > Betsy Hp: Snape is constantly pointing out how good Draco is at Potions. It annoys Harry to no end. It often gets written off as Snape sucking up to Draco (which I've always wondered, why?) but if Snape is going on about the perfect color of Draco's potion I think we can assume Draco has achieved a perfect color. Especially since it's not pointed out that the color isn't actually perfect. > >>Magpie: > > If Draco had been shown to be having trouble in Potions then yes, > I would wonder about him getting an O, and the narrator would no > doubt say how that happened. But since Draco has consistently been > shown to have no trouble in Potions, which has nothing to do with > sucking up to Snape, I see no reason to think he can't have an O. > It's not something the narrator needed to foreshadow that much. Betsy Hp: Exactly. Just as, if Snape is really supposed to be a terrible teacher, instead of dropping bits of praise (the Umbridge scene, the comment about Snape handling a classroom as well as McGonagall) I think JKR would give examples of Snape failing as a teacher. I mean, JKR certainly doesn't beat around the bush regarding Snape's sarcasm and cruelty, so why would she suddenly get coy regarding his teaching abilities? > >>Betsy Hp: > > Of course it is. It's the most elite NEWT course that we've > > seen. > >>Neri: > > If these are the elite, the WW is in trouble. Betsy Hp: When you're elite, you need to push yourself beyond your comfort zone. That's the point of trial and error, and actually it points to these students being good enough to strike out on their own. Even the Prince had his failures. Betsy Hp From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat May 27 22:24:53 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 22:24:53 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, and a Rowling quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153015 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > Joe: > > > Didn't JKR her self say that the "adoration or liking" > > that some people have for Snape and in particular Draco > > was a bit disturbing to her? > > houyhnhnm: > > No, I don't think that's what she said. Here is the quote (from the > August, 2004, Edinburgh Book Festival): > ************************* > Q: Also, will we see more of Snape? > > A: You always see a lot of Snape, because he is a gift of a character. > I hesitate to say that I love him. [Audience member: I do]. You do? > This is a very worrying thing. Are you thinking about Alan Rickman or > about Snape? [Laughter]. Isn't this life, though? I make this > hero?Harry, obviously?and there he is on the screen, the perfect > Harry, because Dan is very much as I imagine Harry, but who does every > girl under the age of 15 fall in love with? Tom Felton as Draco > Malfoy. Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man in the > first place. It took me 35 years to learn that, but I am giving you > that nugget free, right now, at the beginning of your love lives. > ************************* > > Notice that she is not responding to the questioner but to the > audience member who blurted out "I do". Renee: What I notice first and foremost is that JKR says: "Go for a nice man in the first place." Now we may all have our own ideas about what the word "nice" really means, but in this quote the author of the books uses it as the opposite of "bad". This sheds an interesting light on the "nice vs. good" debate. Either JKR doesn't see these two concepts as opposed or fundamentally different at all - or she gives girls the advice to go for the polished surface, which may or may not conceal a black heart, rather than for the possibility of a golden heart hiding behind a semblance of nastiness. Personally, I rather think it's the former, the latter not being a very laudable alternative. And an author's use of a concept in an interview should be a fairly strong indication of the way it's handled in the books. Renee From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sat May 27 22:43:19 2006 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 08:43:19 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] School Size/Class Size was Re: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <447962A7.4570.3DD7855@drednort.alphalink.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 153016 On 27 May 2006 at 13:36, Neri wrote: > Neri: > I fully agree. My strong impression during all the books is that there > are much more than 280. Just one example out of many: Harry doesn't > know *both* seventh-years Gryffindors Belby and McLaggan when Slughorn > introduces them in HBP, and they must have been in Gryffindor house > through the five years of Harry being there. I flatly refuse to > believe he doesn't know them after five years if there are only 10 > Gryffs in his year and about another 10 in the year above him. Shaun: To me, that isn't hard to believe at all. In my school, we had tutor groups within our houses. Each tutor group had 16 members - four from each year in the school. So there were only four in the year above me, and I was in contact with them my whole time at the school (well, until they left). Out of those four I knew two of them. Just because you're in proximity to people doesn't mean you get to know people. It comes down a lot to personality. And Belby, by the way is a Ravenclaw, not a Gryffindor (HBP, p143). And with Harry, I actually think he's got very real reasons why he doesn't get close to people easily, and he doesn't make friends casually. He's capable of friendship - very close friendships - with those he has come to trust, but there's all sorts of factors that I think easily explain why he doesn't seem to have much in the way of casual relationships. And McLaggen doesn't really strike me as the sort of person, Harry would want to get to know - or who would want to get to know Harry unless and until it's interests to do so. My personal impression of Hogwarts is of a fairly small school, but personal impressions really don't mean a lot. 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 leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 22:57:51 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 22:57:51 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape/ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153017 > > Alla: > > No, I am not ignoring the fact that Snape heard Black > saying "serves him right", I just think that since not everything > is clear on what happened that night, it is also not clear that > because of those words Snape should send Black to be Dementors' > food. > > But since you are insisting so much on it, let's examine what ELSE > Snape may have heard, shall we? > You see, despite the conventional wisdom that Snape enters the > stage at this moment of the story, we cannot be sure of it, can't > we? > > "Lupin broke off. There had been a loud creak behind him. The > bedroom door had opened of its own accord. All five of them stared > at it" - PoA, p.352 > > Snape can move without any noise, so it is perfectly reasonable > that he was standing here for a while and the door opened of its > own accord as it states, IMO. Leslie41: Nope. Not reasonable. That's what I'd call "grasping at straws." But even if we say you are right, most of what Snape hears is Hermione saying, over and over again, "don't trust him." And some weird notion that Ron's rat is Peter Pettigrew. Even Black doesn't deny that he killed Harry's parents. All he suggests is that there's more to the story. If we look carefully at what Snape heard after the door opened, when there was "no one" there (which is, according to logic and reason, the place where Rowling wants us to know Snape started listening), what Snape learned was that the Marauders became unregistered animagi who actually went roaming about with a werewolf on Hogwarts grounds once a month. Even Harry says "what if you'd bitten somebody?" Well, the merry pranksters weren't thinking about that, were they? Though they were the smartest students at school, it never occurred to them that galumphing around with a werewolf might, oh...HURT someone. Lupin admits that there were "near misses, many of them," which the Marauders actually LAUGHED about. Er, are you paying attention here, Alla, as to what Lupin is admitting to? What Sirius and James were guilty of as well? Every month they willfully endangered the entire population of Hogwarts, along with anyone else they might have run into, because they felt like having a bit of fun, and breaking the rules. Snape is paying attention, that's for sure. Snape's not one, as we know, for breaking rules. Lupin also tells them, of course, that Dumbledore is the man responsible for allowing Lupin to go to school. That Dumbledore went to great lengths to arrange for it, including setting up the Shrieking Shack and the Whomping Willow. And to his credit Lupin admits to feeling guilty about betraying Dumbledore's trust. But you'll note that Lupin was not guilty enough to stop the funny business every month. Nor was he guilty enough to tell Dumbledore that Black was an unregistered animagus. "...he had no idea I was breaking the rules he had set down for my own and others' safety," Lupin says. And "I always managed to forget my guilty feelings every time we sat down to plan our next month's adventure. And I haven't changed..." He also says "Snape's been right about me all along." I'm not trying to demonize Lupin here, whom I like very much. He's not evil. But he was thoughtless, and weak. It's then that Black says "It served him right," regarding the prank. Hate Snape all you like, and blame him for what you will. But you are absolutely not going to win this one on the basis of the FACTS evident in CANON. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Sat May 27 23:03:22 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 23:03:22 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153018 > Lanval: > Sheesh. Now that I think about it, it would have been easier for me > to swallow if Snape HAD dragged Sirius by his hair to the castle. > There seems to be an added creepiness here, in making the last > voyage of the prisoner a comfortable one... > Leslie41: Hoo-boy! That takes the cake! Sirius deliberately harming Snape physically while Snape is out cold is somehow explicable and not bad at all, yet Snape conjuring a stretcher for his mortal enemy is "creepy." Another incident of a Snape hater determined to ignore all facts and/or twist them to fit their negative view... From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat May 27 23:07:50 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 23:07:50 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153019 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > houyhnhnm: > > The problem is that niceness is a mask for so many other things. > Nastiness in the case of Umbridge. Moral cowardice in the case of > Lupin (which is why I can't see Lupin as good regardless of what side > he is on in the war against Voldemort). Mediocrity (I expect we might > find some examples among the Hufflepuffs if we knew them better). Renee: I really hope you're not putting mediocrity in the same compartment as nastiness and moral cowardice. The vast majority of people in this world is mediocre (or outstanding would cease to be outstanding). This aside, the comment about moral cowardice (apart from being a direct hit on my Lupin button) made me wonder about something. JKR said somewhere that the Sorting Hat is never wrong. Yet it put both Lupin - who has indeed displayed moral cowardice on a couple of occasions - and Wormtail - who sided with Voldemort out of fear - in Gryffindor, the House of the brave at heart. That looks like a contradiction. Either 1) JKR is wrong about what constitutes true courage, or 2) she's lying about the Sorting hat, or 3) cowardice, of whatever kind, does not define Lupin and Wormtail and they are really brave, at heart. Maybe Wormtail shouldn't be written of as a lost cause; he may surprise us all yet. Maybe failing to speak up for Snape in the Pensieve scene, and failing to tell Dumbledore about Padfoot, does not completely cancel out Lupin's courage in the war against Voldemort (unless you think he's ESE, he does risk his life in battle, and spying on Fenrir & co. takes courage, too). Or maybe there's a fourth alternative, and I just can't think of it because it's late and I ought to go to bed. Renee From littleleah at handbag.com Sat May 27 23:44:11 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 23:44:11 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153020 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lanval1015" wrote: > > > > Betsy Hp: > > I seriously doubt Snape cared about how he looked. He's not > > Lockhart after all. > > Lanval: > Actually, they both seem to crave admiration. Leah: No, I don't think so. Lockhart craves celebrity and admiration for talents he does not possess. Snape, I think would like some recognition for talents he does possess. I can't imagine him caring for the results of a poll in Witch Weekly, neither are photographs of himself stirring fantastic potions anywhere to be seen at Spinners End or in his office. > It's no coincidence IMO > that one of the memories Harry sees during the Occlumency lessons is > a girl laughing at a boy on a bucking broom, that Lupin mentions how > hard the loss of the Order of Merlin hit Snape, that Snape always > insists on being called 'sir', and so on. To Snape the world is a Bad > Place, because it has always refused to properly recognize Severus > Snape, Super Genius.> Leah: Snape is basically insecure in the world, that's why he insists on being called 'sir'. A character secure in themselves, like DD for example, doesn't need external reinforcement (though I notice DD insisting on the 'sir' with Riddle, and, on Snape's behalf, on the 'professor' with Harry). I'm not sure that there's any evidence that Snape regards himself a 'Super Genius', but the area where he is secure is in his academic (if that's the word) talents, that's why Spinners End is full of books, and his office full of experiments. He is an exceptional and innovative potion maker, he is highly competent in DADA, and probably DA. Very different, as I've said, from Lockhart. Leah From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun May 28 00:14:02 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 00:14:02 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153021 > >>houyhnhnm: > > I thought we were arguing over whether it is necessary to be > > nice in order to be good, or whether niceness constitutes > > goodness in and of itself... > > Betsy Hp: That was the original premise of this thread, I believe. I think it went basically "Snape isn't nice therefore he cannot be good." Of course, there were the usual definition problems we as a list *always* run into , what is "nice", etc. > >>Lanval: > Oh no, you misunderstood me then. My argument was that > niceness/kindness cannot simply be ignored, or looked at with > contempt, when judging a characters 'goodness'. Betsy Hp: I do think niceness/kindness *can* be a factor in deciding whether or not a character is good. But it is an inherently flawed gage because it's very easy to fake. As demonstrated by Fake!Moody. Also, within this series the "good characters" often behave in a manner that is impossible to describe as nice. And not always for principled reasons. Actually, some of the "good characters" can be just as petty and arbitrary in their cruelty as some of the "bad characters". Which is part of the reason these books garner so much discussion. If this were a Dahl book, for example, there'd be little discussion over who's good or bad. But JKR *loves* to set up a pretty picture and then pull the rug out from under her readers. So one can use overall niceness as a factor in determining whether or not a character is good, but it cannot be relied upon enough to be the *only* factor used, IMO. > >>Renee: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/153015 > What I notice first and foremost is that JKR says: "Go for a nice > man in the first place." > Now we may all have our own ideas about what the word "nice" really > means, but in this quote the author of the books uses it as the > opposite of "bad". This sheds an interesting light on the "nice vs. > good" debate. > Betsy Hp: I snipped the interview quote (just follow the link above to see it) but JKR rather cleverly stops talking about the characters at all. She's not talking about Snape and Draco, she's talking about Rickman and Felton. And she's talking about "nice boy" vs. "bad boy" in a sexual attraction sort of way, not as a morality call. If JKR *really* didn't want her readers going for the "bad boys" in her books, she wouldn't write them so attractively. She'd undercut their hurt/comfort moments, as she does with Ron. Instead, she gives Draco scenes where he's almost noble in his defiance. And she has Snape act with principle when faced with a man he hates. JKR keeps us guessing in her books. She's not about to turn around and reveal all in a promotional tour interview. Or at least, I sure hope she doesn't. > >>Lanval: > Let me try again. > Character A works for the side of good, but is a generally nasty, > disagreeable person. He tends to hurt others by his attitude. > Character B also works for the side of good, but is generally a > friendly and kind person. He rarely hurts others by his > attitude. > What I take exception to is this claim: that Character A not only > deserves to be called as 'good' as Character B, but that A is > actually superior, because B's niceness and kindness are a waste > of time, and/or a sign of insincerity. Betsy Hp: Has this argument been made? Those who distrust Lupin (Character B, I presume?) don't distrust him *because* he is nice, but because he seems to put being nice above doing the right thing. Though, actually, I don't think it's the niceness that's the problem. I think Lupin really hates the idea of rocking the boat. So he tends to shrink back when perhaps it would be better for him to step forward (the pensieve memory, the information on Sirius in PoA). I think Lupin uses his pleasant nature as a bit of a shield, though I'm not sure I'm prepared to call his nature fake or insincere. (I'm not prepared to call much on Lupin. He's a mystery to me. ) Do I think Snape (and I'm talking DDM!Snape here) is as good or better than Lupin? I think Snape has done more for the Order than Lupin. And I think Snape is more likely to step forward and take action if he thinks it's called for. But I'm not sure I'd say Snape is *better* than Lupin, as a human being. They are two very different men with two very different styles and their own strengths and weaknesses. Dumbledore seems to trust Snape more than Lupin, but I'm not sure why that is, so I'm not sure Dumbledore is correct. > >>Lanval: > And now there seems to be another claim, namely that Character A > deserves higher praise, because as a nasty person, it's so much > harder for him to be 'good'...? Sorry, but no. Betsy Hp: Gosh, I haven't heard that particular argument. Myself, I don't think Snape is fighting *against* his personality by choosing to side with Dumbledore. I think Snape has a very strong core set of principles that match well with Dumbledore's. I really think Snape came home, as it were, when he joined with the Order back in the day. So I don't see him struggling with being "good", except for when it forces him to suffer fools. I don't think Snape has a... pleasant personality, but I don't think he's quite as anti-social and rough as first thought. The comfort with which he invited Narcissa and Bellatrix into his home suggests that Snape can actually play well with others, if he chooses to. But he's not going to go out of his way to make others comfortable just for their sake alone. Betsy Hp From bawilson at citynet.net Sat May 27 21:16:50 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 17:16:50 -0400 Subject: Defense of DD re Dursleys.. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153022 > Lupinlore: > Dumbledore's reprehensible failure to intervene at the > Dursleys or to prevent Snape's abuse of Harry cannot be excused > on those grounds -- which it often is. "If DD had restrained > the Dursleys the story would be boring." "If DD had restrained > Snape the story would be boring." Nonsense! Such an excuse is > only a cop out, and in no way gets the "epitome of goodness" > out of the hot water his manifold sins of omission have landed > him in. Nikkalmati: > We are assuming that DD knew what was going on at the Dursley's > and I am not sure he did. BAW: We don't know all the facts yet, but I will make a guess that part of the bargain that DD made with Aunt Petunia involved his not interfering with how she raised Harry so long as he got to Hogwarts alive and well. Even if he did discover later what the true state of affairs was at Privet Drive, we know how the WW feels about contracts. BAW From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Sat May 27 23:59:09 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:59:09 EDT Subject: School Size/Class Size -- Local Culture - Preserved Message-ID: <472.1c72449.31aa41cd@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153023 Steve/bboyminn at yahoo.com writes: >> Now, if we are talking about Muggles, if an American muggle child moves to Enlgand to go to school, he will bring a certain degree of his American culture with him, and that will influence the kids at the local English school. Partly because the world seems fascinated with all things American. << Clare: Hmm, you don't know England then? The foreign is not really accepted well. We have courses on racism now because there are so many Middle Eastern families moving here and many inner city schools have more Pakistani and Indian children than English. As to American, the children accept that which is popular regardless of where it comes from but they are formed by their parents and regardless of rightness, political correctness or my own opinions (which are complex) England is extremely anti- America. An American child coming into an English school would be more likely to be picked on than be the interesting novelty. The world may seem fascinated by all things American and our government may be determined to make us the 51st state but the general opinion is *nay*! We are mongrel and accept that but it's a European mongrelness. smiles, Clare x From celizwh at intergate.com Sun May 28 02:29:18 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 02:29:18 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153024 Renee: > I really hope you're not putting mediocrity in the > same compartment as nastiness and moral cowardice. > The vast majority of people in this world is mediocre > (or outstanding would cease to be outstanding). houyhnhnm: I am, when it is a choice. No one is consigned to mediocrity. Just look at Neville. But maybe I should have found another word. It has a pejorative connotation in American usage (well, I guess it would wouldn't it, in a culture that places so much strss on individualism?), especially when applied to education. One which doesn't match the dictionary definition now that I've finally looked it up. What I was thinking was that niceness (since that was the topic) would probably be a Hufflepuffian virtue, along with fair play, cooperativeness, and a willingness to set aside personal ambition for the common good. So what would the corresponding bad trait of Hufflepuff be? Maybe a tendency to abdicate responsibility for thinking for oneself, to go along with the herd at all costs, not to try to be the best what-you-are, whether or not you can be outstanding. That's what I meant by mediocrity. Gryffindor has its high and low expressions--courage on the one hand, impulsivity on the other, with numerous examples in the books. Harry's courage, along with that of Ron and Hermione, saves lives. The Marauders put lives in danger with their recklessness. All are motivated by a love of daring, but in the case of the former, the love of daring serves a higher purpose, while in the latter its purpose is only for amusement. The bad expression of Slytherin we are well aware of. Ruthless ambition, clannishness, selfishness. I would like to see an exposition of the good expression of Slytherin traits sometime before ther series ends, and Slughorn ain't it, as far as I am concerned. If the good side of the Slytherin principle is the will to transform, to make one's desires manifest, then it could be said that without it, there would be no magic. Just as without Ravenclaw, there would be no theory of magic. What would the bad expression of Ravenclaw be? Maybe a tendency to retreat into the Ivory Tower and to feel no responsibility for the other houses. I have been trying to make the traits of the four houses as I see them conform to the characteristics of the four elements, but I can't quite do it. While Slytherins do display characteristics of the water signs to a great extent, and Gryffindors those of Aries and Leo (I'm not so sure about Sagittarius), water is supposed to be the element associated with emotion, but I see Slytherin and Ravenclaw as the houses of the head--Will and Intellect, respectively. While Gryffindor and Hufflepuff appear to me to be the houses of the heart--Gryffindor representing the ties that bind individuals to each other, and Hufflepuff the ties that bind communities. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun May 28 06:05:14 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 06:05:14 -0000 Subject: Blood, Voldie Baby, Horcruxes, Wands In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153025 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kibakianakaya" wrote: > > These two threads of thought came together into the idea that, if > the Final Battle occurs in the DoM, Harry may vanquish Voldemort by turning him into a *baby*! I see the following scenario. > > Tonks: First, I don't think that we will go back to the MoM. I think that she will do something new. As to the almost babylike Voldie, I have no idea. I wonder if it is somehow connected to the fact that LV now has Harry's blood and the fact that it is also Lily's blood. My first thought on that was that a baby that was never loved will have love in his blood now and a second chance to go to the good side, but that is crazy. I don't think that LV will ever go to the good side. Another thought is this: What happens when you have the blood of your victim in your own body? What type of ancient magic does this invoke? And Harry's blood is both from his mother and his father, both victims of LV. There must be something in the blood of the martyrs here somewhere, but I don't know what it is. Any ideas? Also speaking of Horcruxes.. I have been wondering again about the wand in Ollivander's. I know that somehow we got around to it being Ravenclaw's wand, but do we really know that for sure? I am starting to think that it IS the tiara that is Ravenclaw's and that Gryffindor wand is the one that was in the window. Ollivander's has been in business long before the age of the founding of Hogwarts. One of Mr. Ollivander's ancestors must have made the wand for at least one of the founders of Hogwarts. And we have Gryffindor's sword and his hat, makes sense that his wand would be somewhere too. I know that the song the Slughorn sang implies that a wand is snapped in two at a wizards death, but so is his hat turned inside out, and we have the hat intact, so why not the wand too? Tonks_op From juli17 at aol.com Sun May 28 06:28:07 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 06:28:07 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, and a Rowling quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153027 (My apologies for the previous incomplete post!) > > > > > > houyhnhnm: > > > Here is the quote (from > the > > > August, 2004, Edinburgh Book Festival): > > > ************************* > > > Q: Also, will we see more of Snape? > > > > > > A: You always see a lot of Snape, because he is a gift of a > character. > > > I hesitate to say that I love him. [Audience member: I do]. You > do? > > > This is a very worrying thing. Are you thinking about Alan > Rickman or > > > about Snape? [Laughter]. Isn't this life, though? I make this > > > hero?Harry, obviously?and there he is on the screen, the perfect > > > Harry, because Dan is very much as I imagine Harry, but who does > every > > > girl under the age of 15 fall in love with? Tom Felton as Draco > > > Malfoy. Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man in > the > > > first place. It took me 35 years to learn that, but I am giving > you > > > that nugget free, right now, at the beginning of your love lives. > > > ************************* > > > > > > Notice that she is not responding to the questioner but to the > > > audience member who blurted out "I do". > > > > Renee: > > What I notice first and foremost is that JKR says: "Go for a nice > man > > in the first place." > > > > Now we may all have our own ideas about what the word "nice" really > > means, but in this quote the author of the books uses it as the > > opposite of "bad". This sheds an interesting light on the "nice vs. > > good" debate. Either JKR doesn't see these two concepts as opposed > or > > fundamentally different at all - or she gives girls the advice to go > > for the polished surface, which may or may not conceal a black > heart, > > rather than for the possibility of a golden heart hiding behind a > > semblance of nastiness. > > > > Personally, I rather think it's the former, the latter not being a > > very laudable alternative. And an author's use of a concept in an > > interview should be a fairly strong indication of the way it's > handled > > in the books. > > > > Renee > > > Julie: There are as many different definitions for "bad" as there are for "nice." JKR is clearly talking about societal definitions of bad boys (the kind women often go for and think they can "fix") versus nice guys (the ones who treat a woman well from the get go, even if they are a bit, er, boring). Bad boys can be boys who push the envelope and take crazy risks, who ride fast bikes, who play with women's feelings, who have unresolved issues, who are self- destructive, who are sarcastic and emotionally closed off, etc, etc. Bad boys aren't all drug addicts, wife beaters, bank robbers and axe murderers. There's quite a range, and a bad boy doesn't always or even usually equate with morally corrupt (call that the big BAD). So, yes, Snape, whether he is simply bitter and full of unresolved issues, or whether he is in fact morally corrupt (the big BAD), falls in that bad boy range. (As does Sirius, BTW!) Basically, JKR's statement reads to me more like "Why put up with that kind of crap, why not go for the guy who already has his stuff together?" (Because that other kind may *never* resolve all his issues and get his stuff together.) Speaking of nice, when we're comparing "nice" and "good" in JKR's books (or in life), I think the two are related in a particular way, where nice is good, but good isn't always nice. 1. Nice is being kind, thoughtful, and compassionate toward others-- and I'm talking *genuine* nice here. Faking niceness, like Umbridge or Fudge, is not nice, it's, well, fake. It's a lie. Genuine nice to me is always good. You can't be genuinely nice, act out of true kindness and compassion for others, and be bad. 2. Good *can* include genuine niceness, but it has a more critical component, which is moral rightness. Being good means acting from an ethical code, or doing what is right (often over what would be easy). It doesn't have to be acting out of compassion or out of kindness (though doing what is right is often the same as doing what is kind or compassionate, even if the doer isn't acting from that feeling). So, one can't really be a genuinely nice person without being good. But--a big BUT here--a person can act in a moral manner without that act being based in niceness. Snape can conjure stretchers and transport the unconscious Sirius and Harry back to Hogwarts, he can save Harry from Quirrel, he can send the Order to save the kids at the DoM, he can stop Goyle from strangling Neville, all without feeling any kindness or compassion toward those he's helping. He can do it just because it's the right thing to do. Snape can be morally good--he can do what is right--all without being the least bit nice. He can be a good guy though he definitely isn't a nice guy. Julie From greatraven at hotmail.com Sun May 28 09:14:12 2006 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 09:14:12 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Umbridge (long) (Was: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153029 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > > Carol responds: > While I agree that there's a lesson here and that Umbridge is an > allegorical figure never intended as a two-dimensional character, let > me get one small disagreement out of the way before I present my own > half-formed thoughts on the subject. Harry thinks she looks like > "someone's maiden aunt" until he sees her from the front and > recognizes her as the witch from his hearing, someone who clearly > wanted him to be convicted of underage magic. And even before he knew > where she stood with regard to his own personal education and welfare, > he thought that she looked like a toad with a fly (the silly little > bow) unwisely perched on her head. He expects her to speak in a croak, > and the sweet little girl voice, like the polite little "hem! hem!" > signals fake niceness from the first. > > Granted, she's not meant to be a terrifying figure like the slit- nosed > monster Voldemort, but she's certainly meant to be revolting from the > start. The pink cardigan and "Alice band" and kittens are all part of > a little-girl image that contrasts absurdly with her pouchy eyes and > wide toadlike mouth with little pointy teeth. (A toad with teeth?) The > absurd contrast between her appearance and behavior verges on the > comic, like the caricatures of politicians in political cartoons, and > yet it's never truly comic because we know from the first that she's > out to get Harry. (I suspect, as I said in another post, that she's > manipulated Fudge into viewing both him and DD as dangerous to the > MoM, but I've already stated my views on that topic.) > > We next see her at Hogwarts, giving a speech full of "waffle" with > "important stuff" hidden in it: "Progress for progress's sake should > be discouraged" and whatever is undesirable in the curriculum is to be > "pruned." Hermione arrives immediately at the correct conclusion: "The > Ministry is interfering at Hogwarts." > > We've already seen JKR making digs at politics and bureaucracy via > Fudge (who is nevertheless, IMO, a more human and sympathetic > character than Umbridge, however weak and foolish and easily > manipulated he may be. I rather liked him in "The Other Minister," > where he's forced to concede that he's been deluded). But something > more is going on here: not politics as usual in the WW but politics > entering the educational system, bureaucratic control of the > curriculum. Umbridge (rhetorically) asks Hermione is she's a > "Ministry-trained educational expert" (OoP Am. ed. 242), implying that > she herself is such an "expert." > > I'm not British, so I'm not on solid ground here, but I wonder whether > JKR, who took some sort of course in teacher training before teaching > French in Scotland, is covertly critiquing either the state- controlled > British school system or the educational theory that passes for > teacher training in some places. (I could talk about my own "training" > to teach when I received my B.S. in Ed. back in the 1970s, but that's > ancient history and I'm an American. IMHO, matters have become even > worse here--sixth graders of my acquaintance can barely read and > think that Afghanistan is in South America--but I'm more interested in > whether there's a connection with trends in British education. > > Before I continue along this line, looking at Umbridge herself in the > classroom, let me note that she reminds me of two diametrically > opposed characters from literature, Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor, who > believed that the mass of people could not think for themselves and > had to be led and cared for like sheep (anyone who tried to persuade > them to think for themselves was a troublemaker who had to be killed > for the public good--Harry's detentions, anyone?) and Dickens's > Wackford Squeers, the sadistic schoolmaster who "teaches" the boys at > Dotheboys Hall by providing them with useless and inaccurate > information and beating or starving them into submission. The Grand > Inquisitor believes that he's acting for the good of the common people > by maintaining their ignorance and dependence on him and others like > him; Squeers is a caricature of a schoolmaster whose name and > appearance are darkly comic, as Umbridge's are, who sadistically > abuses his pupils for his own advantage without giving them the > education their parents or guardians are paying for. (Obviously there > are differences here, but Dickens is satirizing a certain type of > school that really existed in his time in the hope of calling public > attention to the abuse, and I'm wondering if JKR is doing something > similar with Umbridge.) > > If anyone is interested in following up the High Inquisitor/Grand > Inquisitor parallel (surely the name of her office suggests a > connection?), the Grand Inquisitor dream scene from "The Brothers > Karamazov" can be read here: > > http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/philosophy/existentialism/dostoevsky /grand.html > > and an analysis pointing out its key elements can be read here: > > http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/philosophy/existentialism/dostoevsky /grand-analysis.html > > To return to canon, Umbridge treats the students as if they were > kindergarten children, saying in her opening speech how happy she is > to see their "happy little faces," making them say "Good afternoon, > Professor Umbridge," suppressing discussion, and punishing dissenting > opinions with detention. (I'm surprised that Hermione didn't at least > have points docked for her criticism of the text; Harry's detentions, > however, relate to the more important issue of contradicting the > official Ministry doctrine that Voldemort has returned. Such "lies" > must be punished, and cruelly.) > > And there's the whole matter of teaching defensive *theory* instead of > practical defense. Not only does the textbook, "Defensive Magical > *Theory*" by Wilbert *Slinkhard*) contain no practical information on > casting spells, Umbridge has the students read it in class (surely > they should read the books outside class and at least discuss what > they've read?) In marked contrast to Snape in HBP, she tells them to > put "wands away" and tells Hermione that she "can't imagine any > situation arising in her classroom that would require [students] to > *use* a defensive spell" (242). > > Obviously such a class (in contrast to Snape's) is worse than useless > in preparing students to confront Voldemort and the Death Eaters, and > is intended to perpetuate the official Ministry position that LV is > not returning. But I'm wondering is it's also a caricature of > educational theory, or theory in general. The textbook is as boring as > Professor Binns' lectures; the words slide through Harry's brain > without making any impression (240). The three goals of the class, > which remind me of the "behavioral objectives" I was supposed to > formulate in creating a lesson plan back in those useless education > classes I took in the 70s, reveal the uselessness of the theory > they're learning, particularly the third one: "Placing the use of > defensive magic in a context for practical use" (340). "Placing "use" > in a context for "use"? What? Come again? Do these words mean > anything, or are they just a circular waffle? (Which reminds me of the > title and author of one of the first-year textbooks, "Magical Theory" > by Adalbert *Waffling*.) > > So: allegory, caricature, satire, attacks on bureaucracy and the type > of "education" (indoctrination) that expects students to be attentive > little children passively absorbing approved theories and principles, > possible connections to Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor who wants to > relieve the masses of responsibility so that they can remain happily > ignorant and punishes (kills) troublemakers who raise doubts in their > minds. What does it all mean? Does the depiction of Umbridge have any > relevance to educational trends in the UK or the "dumbing down" of > education? Surely it's more than a plot device to get a bureaucrat > into Hogwarts to thwart the students' practical training in DADA and > usurp control through her increasingly invasive decrees. > > Or are we just supposed to hate her because she's mean to Harry? > > Carol, hoping that someone will respond given the length of time she's > spent composing this post! Sue here: Hi, Carol, very interesting post! I'm living in Australia and was brought up here, so am not quite familiar with the British system. The impression I get from the events of OOP is that Umbridge is sent to Hogwarts - or, rather, gets herself into Hogwarts, for one reason and one only: to interfere with the actions of that Muggle-lover, Dumbledore. DD seems to be a lot more than just a school Principal (and I should say, in all the years I've been working in the school system, I have never encountered anyone that wonderful to work with). The school is a reflection of the WW in general, especially as it later appears in HBP, with fear and loathing and people accusing each other and others disappearing. (Incidentally, the purple leaflet distributed to the wizard community in HBP reminds me chillingly of what's happening in Australia at the moment, with the government issuing propaganda publications and telling us to be "alert but not alarmed".) Whether it's a comment on British education I don't know, but I suspect not, or at least less than it is on the world in general as it is now, with politicians appealing to the worst in people. Teachers' styles vary. I remember my Year 11 history teacher at school, who used to make us sit down one leg at a time, then spend entire sessions telling us sternly not to waste time. Despite this, I ended up liking her, because once she got started, she told the most entertaining stories about modern history, including her own memories of travelling in Italy just before WWII and being tempted to draw moustache and glasses on giant posters of Mussolini! She also warned us not to trust history books without asking what was in it for the writer concerned. She just had a weird style. Definitely not Umbridge, though! From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun May 28 10:55:17 2006 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 10:55:17 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153030 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > Renee: > > > I really hope you're not putting mediocrity in the > > same compartment as nastiness and moral cowardice. > > The vast majority of people in this world is mediocre > > (or outstanding would cease to be outstanding). > > houyhnhnm: > > I am, when it is a choice. No one is consigned to mediocrity. Just > look at Neville. But maybe I should have found another word. It has > a pejorative connotation in American usage (well, I guess it would > wouldn't it, in a culture that places so much strss on > individualism?), especially when applied to education. One which > doesn't match the dictionary definition now that I've finally looked > it up. > Renee: Ah. That's enough to reassure me :) - I did go by the dictionary definition. And I agree with your analysis of the four Houses. From littleleah at handbag.com Sun May 28 11:10:36 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 11:10:36 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Umbridge (long) (Was: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153031 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: (snipped) >> I'm not British, so I'm not on solid ground here, but I wonder whether > JKR, who took some sort of course in teacher training before teaching > French in Scotland, is covertly critiquing either the state- controlled > British school system or the educational theory that passes for > teacher training in some places. (I could talk about my own "training" > to teach when I received my B.S. in Ed. back in the 1970s, but that's > ancient history and I'm an American. IMHO, matters have become even > worse here--sixth graders of my acquaintance can barely read and > think that Afghanistan is in South America--but I'm more interested in > whether there's a connection with trends in British education. (snipped) > Does the depiction of Umbridge have any > relevance to educational trends in the UK or the "dumbing down" of > education? Surely it's more than a plot device to get a bureaucrat > into Hogwarts to thwart the students' practical training in DADA and > usurp control through her increasingly invasive decrees. > > Or are we just supposed to hate her because she's mean to Harry? > > Carol, hoping that someone will respond given the length of time she's > spent composing this post! Leah: I certainly read Umbridge as in part a criticism of increasing bureaucracy and control in the UK education system, and my husband, who works in higher education, hugely enjoyed Rowling's depiction of her. Certainly diktats from the powers that be in his institution and its governing bodies are now referred to as Educational Decrees. Leah (who must do the washing, so a short reply to a long and interesting post) From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun May 28 12:33:00 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 12:33:00 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, and a Rowling quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153032 > Julie: > There are as many different definitions for "bad" as there are > for "nice." JKR is clearly talking about societal definitions of bad > boys (the kind women often go for and think they can "fix") versus > nice guys (the ones who treat a woman well from the get go, even if > they are a bit, er, boring). Pippin: She's also talking about the difference between fantasy and reality when it comes to being scared. People love to pretend they're in danger, that's why thrill rides and horror movies are so popular. JKR refers to the movies, which neatly allows her to point out that Rickman and Felton are only pretending to be dangerous while avoiding the question of whether Snape is. But even people who have crushes on Lucius Malfoy are still only pretending they're in danger, because Lucius isn't real. JKR is talking to young girls, and telling them not to think that scary relationships in real life should be pursued. Julie: > Speaking of nice, when we're comparing "nice" and "good" in JKR's > books (or in life), I think the two are related in a particular way, > where nice is good, but good isn't always nice. > > 1. Nice is being kind, thoughtful, and compassionate toward others-- > and I'm talking *genuine* nice here. Faking niceness, like Umbridge > or Fudge, is not nice, it's, well, fake. It's a lie. Genuine nice to > me is always good. You can't be genuinely nice, act out of true > kindness and compassion for others, and be bad. Pippin: I don't think Fudge's compassion is fake in the sense that he knows he doesn't mean it. He's just someone who acts out of true compassion and kindness until his self-interest is at stake. He does the right thing only as long as it's easy. Kindness comes naturally to some people -- it's no skin off their nose to put others at ease, in fact they take pleasure in it. But sometimes people who make friends easily can cast them aside easily too -- they've learned they can always make more. I think JKR wants us not to put too much faith in kindnesss, just as she doesn't want us to put too much faith in rules. It's a component of goodness but it's not the whole thing. She could be going for an Inkling-like illustration of the teaching that even people who make a living off gouging widows and orphans are kind to their friends: "or if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?" Personally I have more respect for someone who knows he's cruel but tries to keep it in check and make amends for his abuses, than I do for someone who is kind most of the time but never thinks of his occasional cruelty as abuse because it's him doing it. In other words, I respect DDM!Snape more than Sirius, though if I wanted a godfather I'd undoubtedly prefer Sirius to Snape. Pippin From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Sun May 28 17:07:06 2006 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 13:07:06 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's death, Snape's sacrifice (was Re: Predictions abo... Message-ID: <47f.196325f.31ab32ba@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153033 > Julie: > I've seen this theory before, that Harry will die and rejoin his > loved ones beyond the veil, and I personally can't imagine a worse > ending. Or a worse message to send children (who still make up a > large number if not a majority of HP readers). It's like > saying "Don't bother about this life, the next one's so much better > anyway! Especially if you've lost loved ones, you can just join them > for a fabulous friend and family reunion! Really, who wants to wait > for that anyway?" > > I know that's not what anyone who's suggested this theory is > advocating of course, but I think it could certainly be read that way > by children or others who've lost people important to them or who are > finding life a struggle for whatever reason. If Harry Potter can > escape his suffering, avoid having to live with the loss of so many > people he's loved and just get "home" to them that much sooner, why > don't I deserve the same? > > I'm also not disagreeing here with Dumbledore's assertion that death > is the next great adventure. That's a great way to look at it. > Dumbledore doesn't fear death, which is very admirable, but he > doesn't embrace it either. He embraces life, and he makes the very > most of *that* great adventure first, gracefully moving on to the > next adventure, death, only when there is no other option left. > > I can only hope Harry is allowed to do the same. He's lived so far > with too much pain and sorrow, and with a cloud hanging constantly > over his head. If he dies without ever having had the opportunity to > embrace life and all it can give him, then he won't be moving on to > the *next* adventure, because he won't have experienced the first > one. And Harry deserves NOTHING less than that. I can only believe > that his parents, Sirius, and the others beyond the veil who love him > also want that for him far more than they want him to come "home." > > So while Lupinlore may toss his HP books in the wood chipper if Snape > isn't publically flogged while the citizens of the WW chant "You > reprehensible CHILD ABUSER!", for me it would be Harry going beyond > the veil permanently as an implied reward for his goodness and > courage that would induce me to give away my HP books. (I don't > expect JKR will kill off Harry, so really I'm just expressing my > opinion here.) > > > Sandy: Hear-Hear, Julie!! I tried to snip this down but could not because I think every word of it is significant. And I would like to add a hardy "me too". If the hero of this series were an adult I *might* be able to accept him dying, though probably not, but this is a child, and a child who has been through hell every step of the way. I can't express it any more eloquently than Julie has, so I won't try. I keep telling myself repeatedly that JKR can't, and won't kill Harry off, but we are speaking of JKR here, and as we know *anything* is possible with her. So, as I have said many times before on many forums, if JKR kills Harry off my books will go straight into the garbage can because that is the only place they will belong, and I will feel I have spent, and wasted, a lot of time, emotion and money for nothing. Yes, I love the books and the great adventure they have taken me on, but I also love Harry and could never read the books again if he does not survive and find some peace and happiness, which he so richly deserves. Yes, yes, a lot of us don't get what we deserve, but this is a fictional ch aracter (although very real to me) who CAN if the author allows it, and by allowing it can send the message that there is always hope. How I wish I could express myself as well as so many of you do. Bottom line -- if Harry dies I am done with the books and would never read another word JKR wrote. It isn't eloquent, but it's the pure unvarnished truth that would come from an emotional let-down of the first water. Sandy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From inspirit at ptd.net Sun May 28 18:00:56 2006 From: inspirit at ptd.net (Kim) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 14:00:56 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's death, Snape's sacrifice (was Re: Predictions abo... References: <47f.196325f.31ab32ba@aol.com> Message-ID: <003501c68280$ab04c880$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 153034 >Sandy emotes- Bottom line -- if Harry dies I am done with the books and would never read another word JKR wrote. It isn't eloquent, but it's the pure unvarnished truth that would come from an emotional let-down of the first water. >From Kim: You go Sandy! I'm burying my 2 week old grandson on Tuesday. Life is full of hell. If we can't celebrate the life of the major characters in this series of books then I'm through too. How many years of energy we've put into them! I can't bear already that Dumbledore is gone. Ron, Hermione, Harry, Neville, Snape, Lupin, Luna, the Weasleys, I really hope that all of them will survive triumphant. I really love McGonnegal and have connected with her character from day one but I somehow see her as dying, perhaps because she's lived a long life and would die fighting spectacularly. But the kids, no. If they go, I go. If my little one has to lose one of her fictional heros who's story she's read 4 times just after her dreams of helping raise a nephew are destroyed, it will be too hard, just too cruel. And there are a lot of kids like her. A lot of adults like me. We've lost so much in our lives. That's what life is about. But this is fiction and in fiction the heros are allowed to live. Fan fiction (I do want to start reading some of that) can go crazy taking these young adults to all sorts of future adventures if they're allowed to live. And for those of us who daydream, our daydreams can take them there too. But if they're killed, then it ends there. And that would be just too sad. Kim [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From OctobersChild48 at aol.com Sun May 28 18:02:52 2006 From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 14:02:52 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] A fate worse than death ALIAS finale vs Book 7 Message-ID: <443.2178862.31ab3fcc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153035 In a message dated 5/27/06 6:35:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, saberbunny at yahoo.ca writes: > > Harry has already killed Quirrell, without splitting his soul, although > > that was luck. > > Sandy: > I think you are confusing your mediums here. In the book Harry did not kill > Quirrel. Voldemort did. > > > Catherine again: > Well to quote Dumbledore, "Voldemort left Quirrel to die". So I guess > technically, neither Voldemort or Harry killed him outright. But did Quirrel die > because of what Harry did to him, because Voldemort left his body or a > combination of both? > Harry certainly had a part in his death. > > Catherine > > > > > Sandy: In your original post you said Harry killed Quirrel which just simply is not true. You have the canon correct, Dumbledore did tell Harry that Voldemort left Quirrel to die. Canon does not, however, tell us exactly *how* Quirrel died, but it is your take that Harry played a part in his death. That is vastly different from having killed, but I am not convinced that Harry played a part in Quirrel's death, or at least is not responsible for it. Had Quirrel not been possessed by Voldemort Harry's touch would have had no effect on him at all. Furhermore, the burns that Harry inadvertantly inflicted upon Quirrel would not have been bad enough to kill him. Voldemort, and Voldemort alone, is responsible for Quirrel's death. It is what Voldemort does best, takes what he needs or wants and then kills. Seeing things the way you do then Harry also had a part in Cedric's death. Just because Harry was there and burned Quirrel in an effort to keep him from getting the stone does not mean he played a part in Quirrel's death, and he certainly did not kill, or try to kill. Sandy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sun May 28 18:19:48 2006 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (Ffred Clegg) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 19:19:48 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] School Size/Class Size -- Local Culture - Preserved References: <1148764371.1150.58898.m31@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000301c68283$4f5f7360$da096bd5@Billie> No: HPFGUIDX 153036 Steve wrote: >But Hogwarts is a very different school. JKR was wise when she made >muggle electronic devices NOT work at Hogwarts. The imposes a degree >of cultural isolation on the school and it's students. Certainly >muggle kids can talk about movies, TV, and music, but with no working >examples, I would guess those topics would get old very fast. To a degree, I'd agree. But it _is_ all about degree. If a large enough proportion of the intake are entirely Muggle, then you've got a constant reinforcement every September with a new group talking about films, tv, and Muggle music, to the extent that everyone becomes familiar with those (and indeed other) concepts. Instead of having a very small minority who have to conform to the WW culture in order to exist within it. if you have a large enough minority, the WW culture itself has to change in order to cope. We don't see that happening. Mixed-blood children of course are normally already familiar with the WW before they arrive at Hogwarts, and know what to expect and how their lives are likely to be in the WW when they graduate. The others soon come into line because their frames of reference (eg Dean calling for a red card) are met with blank incomprehension. >So, in a sense, it's not that hard for one culture to isolate itself >in another culture. Of course, it's is not /pure/ isolation; there is >always a degree of cross-cultural contamination, but the local >dominant culture always overwhelms the broader culture. So, in >Chinatown, Chinese culture tends to dominate even as it incorporates >aspect of London culture, and while I as an American may move to >England, it is much more likely that England will transform me, than >for me to transform England. Another good example was the Welsh valleys in the 19th century. Their language was Welsh. Many people moved there from England and Ireland to work in the coal industry but to get along, they had to learn Welsh in order to communicate. At the beginning of the 20th century, the pace of change increased, and the number of English people rose dramatically, about a quarter of a million moving in. The change on that scale meant that they no longer needed to learn Welsh, instead the locals changed to conform and speak English with the incomers, thereby changing the local culture dramatically. I suspect that the same would apply with someone marrying into Chinatown. >After all that rambling, I guess what I am saying is that given the >unique circumstances, I can see how the Wizarding Culture dominates >and is preserved even as younger wizards incorporate aspects of the >/foriegn/ muggle culture into their society. The Wizard World in >general and Hogwart especially are very isolated, and that tend to >preserve the local culture. and there we'd both agree. hwyl Ffred From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sun May 28 18:19:40 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 18:19:40 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153037 > houyhnhnm: > > What I was thinking was that niceness (since that was the topic) would > probably be a Hufflepuffian virtue, along with fair play, > cooperativeness, and a willingness to set aside personal ambition for > the common good. So what would the corresponding bad trait of > Hufflepuff be? Maybe a tendency to abdicate responsibility for > thinking for oneself, to go along with the herd at all costs, not to > try to be the best what-you-are, whether or not you can be > outstanding. That's what I meant by mediocrity. a_svirn: This is a serious accusation to saddle the Hufflepuffs with. And for the life of me I don't see how it can be the other side of the "fair play" coin. Far from "abdicating the responsibility for thinking for oneself" fairmindedness implies the ability and determination to judge for oneself. From inspirit at ptd.net Sun May 28 18:34:38 2006 From: inspirit at ptd.net (Kim) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 14:34:38 -0400 Subject: The Bloody Baron and Snape References: Message-ID: <006401c68285$60a25370$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> No: HPFGUIDX 153038 The ghosts still fascinate me, especially the Bloody Baron. Doesn't he look a bit like Snape? Of course, if they're related that blows my theory that he's Slytherin since Snape wasn't the heir. So who are these ghosts? Surely they'll come up somehow before it's over. I'd love to think that they are more than window dressing for the books. Kim Scholastic US Paperback, page 124: Harry looked over at the Sytherin table and saw a horrible ghost sitting there, with blank staring eyes, a gaunt face, and robes stained with silver blood. Same book, page 126: Professor Quirrell, in his absurd turban, was talking to a teacher with greasy black hair, a hooked nose, and sallow skin. Same book, page 136: Snape finished calling the names and looked up at the class. His eyes were black like Hagrid's, but they had none of Hagrid's warmth. They were cold and empty and made you think of dark tunnels. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun May 28 18:50:31 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 18:50:31 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Umbridge (long) (Was: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153039 Sue wrote: > Hi, Carol, very interesting post! I'm living in Australia and was brought up here, so am not quite familiar with the British system. > > The impression I get from the events of OOP is that Umbridge is sent > to Hogwarts - or, rather, gets herself into Hogwarts, for one reason > and one only: to interfere with the actions of that Muggle-lover, > Dumbledore. DD seems to be a lot more than just a school Principal > The school is a reflection of the WW in general, especially > as it later appears in HBP, with fear and loathing and people > accusing each other and others disappearing. > > Whether it's a comment on British education I don't know, but I > suspect not, or at least less than it is on the world in general as > it is now, with politicians appealing to the worst in people. Carol responds: Hi, Sue. thanks for responding. I agree that Hogwart is, or should be "a reflection of the WW in general," but let's look at what Umbridge says. In response to Harry, who asks what good theory will be in the real world, she says, "This is school, Mr. Potter, not the real world" (244). Harry retorts, "So we're not supposed to prepare for what's waiting out there?" and Umbridge responds, "There is nothing waiting out there" (244). In part this response reflects the official Ministry position that Voldemort has not returned. In terms of the WW, Harry's "real world," the implication is that the purpose of a Defense against the Dark Arts is not to teach students to defend themselves against Dark wizards. In more general terms, the implication is that the purpose of an education is not to prepare students for the real world. What is the purpose of an education, then, in Umbridge's view? She answers that question herself in response to Dean Thomas's comment that he "learned loads" from Umbridge's predecessor, Crouch!Moody, despite his being a maniac (please don't mistake me; I'm not defending Crouch!Moody, one of my least favorite characters): "Now, it is the view of the Ministry that a theoretical knowledge will be more than sufficient to get you through your examination, which, after all, is what school is about" (243). So education is about passing examinations? That sounds to me like "teaching to the test," one of the criticisms launched against the teaching practices in many American schools. What I want to know is whether something of the same sort is going on in Britain. Or, setting aside *real* real life and looking at "real life" in the WW, which consists not only of the jobs students will apply after Hogwarts and other mundane matters (the students do, after all, have to start considering careers in their fifth year and deciding which NEWT classes they want to take if they pass the requisite OWLS), but in the case of DADA, consists of protecting themselves against the Dark Arts, Umbridge is reducing the class to reading a book on theory in the classroom, without discussion and with no practical application whatever, with the (ostensible) aim of helping them pass their DADA OWL. "Children like themselves" are in no danger, and troublemakers who suggest otherwise are to be reported to her. So, like Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor with the ignorant masses, she is indoctrinating the students with the delusion that the Ministry will protect them and they need to do nothing to defend themselves. All they need to do is regurgitate the theory on the written portion of the OWL and perform the defensive spells for the first and perhaps only time, based on what they've read, for the sole purpose of passing the test. Even for Charms, this methodology would not work. We've seen that the students generally (and admittedly, JKR is not absolutely consistent), need to practice a spell in order to do it right. With DADA, practice is especially important because a defensive spell is intended for use against an attacker, and DADA, as its name implies, is specifically intended to teach defense against Dark magic. Umbridge's theory-based course is useless for this purpose. DADA is unlike the other classes at Hogwarts, which do seem to exist to prepare students for careers in the WW (as well as teaching them to use their magical abilities in a controlled and somewhat practical way). For some students, those who wish to work in magical law enforcement, for example, DADA serves a similar purpose. But it also serves as a form of self-defense, always important because of Dark creatures and Dark wizards that a witch or wizard is likely to encounter, but especially important now. In another year, Umbridge's "teaching" would simply be a waste of time, like Binns's droning lectures, but in a year when Voldemort has been restored to his physical form and is about to return, it is actually dangerous. Theory will not protect the students, and Harry knows it, as does Hermione, and in consequence, they form the DA. In part, of course, Umbridge's classes are a plot device. As you say, Umbridge is in Hogwarts primarily to undermine Dumbledore. But we don't see her from Dumbledore's point of view, we see her from Harry's, and what she does (or doesn't) do in the classroom is important. In essence, she is a DADA teacher in name only, and her failure to teach this crucial subject leads to the students, for the first time (unless we count Harry preparing for the TWT), trying to teach themselves. If she taught any other subject--Charms, Transfiguration, Herbology, Potions--they probably would simply sleep through her classes as they do with Binns, even in an OWL year. But since she is supposed to be teaching them to defend themselves against the Dark Arts (and they've had only one or two competent DADA instructors in the past five years), they resort to forming the DA. Umbridge's classes can profitably be contrasted with Snape's, which, however unpleasant, do exactly what Harry, Hermione, and the others state that a DADA class ought to do. They involve students learning how to defend themselves from each other, and sometimes from the teacher--the only practical method of learning to defend themselves against "what's out there." Maybe JKR's whole point in depicting Umbridge's DADA classes is to contrast them with Snape's. In marked contrast to her determined assertion that "nothing is out there," he knows perfectly well that Voldemort is back and what he is capable of doing. He begins by papering the walls of his classroom with posters showing the effects of attacks by Dementors and Inferi and of Unforgiveable Curses like Cruciatus. Instead of having them read a useless and boring text on defensive theory, he assigns essays on Dementors and Dark Curses and similar topics and has the students practice nonverbal defensive spells in class. (No wonder Snape has wanted to teach this class all along, despite the so-called jinx on it. He knows what he's doing and he's good at it.) But I wonder, too, if there's an element of real-world satire in Umbridge's teaching methodology and educational philosophy. Carol, who would love to see Umbridge in a duel with Snape From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun May 28 19:33:32 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 19:33:32 -0000 Subject: School Size/Class Size -- Local Culture - Preserved In-Reply-To: <000301c68283$4f5f7360$da096bd5@Billie> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153040 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ffred Clegg" wrote: > > Steve wrote: > >But Hogwarts is a very different school. JKR was wise when she > >made muggle electronic devices NOT work at Hogwarts. That imposes > > a degree of cultural isolation on the school and it's students > > .... > > To a degree, I'd agree. But it _is_ all about degree. If a large > enough proportion of the intake are entirely Muggle, then you've > got a constant reinforcement every September with a new group > talking about films, tv, and Muggle music, to the extent that > everyone becomes familiar with those (and indeed other) concepts. > Instead of having a very small minority who have to conform to > the WW culture in order to exist within it. if you have a large > enough minority, the WW culture itself has to change in order > to cope. > bboyminn: Absolutely, I agree with your 'to a degree' statement. In fact I said, 'Of course, it's is not /pure/ isolation; there is always a degree of cross-cultural contamination,...'. But in this specific case, we need to look at the DEGREE of cultural isolation that Hogwarts provides. In a part of my post that you snipped, I made a point of referring to Hogwarts as a Boarding School, and that is a very important point. While a muggle-born's 'back home' friends are watching TV everyday, going to the movies on the weekend, and constantly tracking and discussing Top 40's Pop music and the latest teen heart-throb, the muggle-born his or herself is isolated for 10 months at Hogwarts completely cut off from all 'Pop' cultural references. In that degree of isolation, the local wizard culture dominates because it is the only culture that is available. Now in the example you gave of a greater number of English moving into Wales, we see a clear example of my point. When the number of English become sufficiently large, they are no longer culturally isolated. They have enough Englanders around them that they can create their own 'Englishtown', as it were, and have their own culture dominate. Because the number of English in Wales has grow so large, they become the dominant culture and the local Welch culture suffers because of it. I think, base on what I heard, that may feared the Welsh language would die out because everyone was learning English. Fortunately, or so I've been lead to believe, a sufficient number of young people are, in hopes of perserving their heritage, learing the Welsh language. So, my central point was that Hogwarts provides 10 months of near total cultural isolation. When muggle-borns do go back home, they are completely out of touch with the fast moving "what's hot, what's not" world of modern youth culture. I suspect that cultural isolation is re-enforced by their need for secrecy and the ciriculum taught at Hogwarts. It's hard to get excited by your giggly muggle chums hyperventilating over Jesse McCartney, when you know that in the blink of an eye you could turn them all to jelly, and transform Jesse McCartney into a hedgehog. In view of the magnitude of the power you carry and the secrets you know, the airhead concerns of the modern teen would seem pretty trivial. Thereby, contributing even more to the cultural isolation. > ...edited... > > and there we'd both agree. > > hwyl > > Ffred bboyminn: Yes, we do agree. Your Welsh example of one culture overwhelming another is perfectly valid, and because it actually happened, perfectly true. But in Wales, they still have modern communication; TV, Radio, Movies, Telephone, Internet, etc..., most of which is also dominated by English speakers. But Hogwarts is totally isolated, and isolated for 10 months out of the year relative to the students. That is certainly sufficient isolation for the student to be more likely to take on 'wizard world' frames of reference, though certainly, some muggle culture does creep into the wizard world as is seen in the casual dress in common muggle clothes of young witches and wizards. Still relative to modern hip-hop pop-culture fashions, even the best young wizard would be hopelessly out of date. Just a few more thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun May 28 20:34:23 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 20:34:23 -0000 Subject: Nice (kind) vs. Good In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153041 Pippin wrote: > I think JKR wants us not to put too much faith in kindnesss, just > as she doesn't want us to put too much faith in rules. It's > a component of goodness but it's not the whole thing. Carol responds: Apologies for oversnipping, but I think you've made a key point here, or rather, a key point and a more precise word for the concept people are discussing in this thread. "Nice," as any third-grade teacher will tell her students, is a vague word that conveys almost nothing (almost as bad as "positive qualities," used by college freshmen to sound as if they're saying something important and meaningful). "Kind" is much more precise, and is, I think, what most people in this thread are trying to convey by "nice." More important, kindness is, as you say, only one component of goodness, or virtue, to use an old-fashioned term that has gone out of favor thanks to its use in the nineteenth century as a synonym for chastity in women. What, exactly, is goodness? The dictionary provides very little help. Thinking of goodness as virtue, or rather a composite of virtues, may be of some help. If Dumbledore is "the epitome of goodness," what are the virtues of which that goodness is comprised? What virtues does JKR value and depict through him? What is a virtue, anyway, since modern Americans and Europeans don't, to my knowledge, generally talk in such outmoded terms? For the ancient Greeks, moral excellence (arete) consisted of wisdom, moderation/temperance, bravery, justice, and piety. I think we can eliminate piety from the list as it doesn't seem to apply to the WW, but the others seem applicable as components of overall virtue or goodness in the WW. Kindness, however, is not on the list. The Romans, who had a long list of virtues ("virtus" means manliness, qualities possessed by the ideal man, women being expected merely to be chaste, modest, and obedient to their husbands to be considered "good"), including comitas (friendliness or courtesy), clementia (mercy or gentleness), dignitas (a sense of self-worth), firmitas (tenacity), humanitas (refinement, being cultured, as in "the humanities"), industria (hard work), and my favorite with regard to Severus, severitas (sternness[!] or self-control). Oddly, the Romans, whom we tend to think of in terms of orgies and blood sports, with a few aqueducts and "veni, vidi, vici" thrown in, did value kindness, or the appearance of it, at least during the Roman Republic. I would say that Dumbledore measures up to the Roman standard, whether or not it's what JKR had in mind, even in terms of severitas (sternness on some occasions and self-control almost always). And Snape has, at least, firmness (tenacity), industria (hard work), humanitas (being cultured--note his book-lined shelves and his appreciation for the "art and science" of Potions), and, of course, severitas (except for the three of four occasions in which he loses control). What about Christian virtues, which are more familiar, and perhaps more applicable, since JKR is a Christian? Of the theological virtues, faith, hope, and charity (love), only love seems applicable. (Is DD hopeful? Is hope a virtue in the HP books? I'm not sure. Possibly the cardinal virtues--prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude--are a closer fit. They don't fully characterize Dumbledore, but it could be argued that Snape, who is so frequently unkind, does possess these particular virtues and so is good or "virtuous" according to this standard. If we consider the capital virtues (the opposite of the Seven Deadly Sins), we have humility, liberality, brotherly love, meekness, temperance, chastity, and diligence. I'm not sure about liberality, and I doubt that many people here would consider meekness a virtue, but I would argue that DD has brotherly love (in the sense of an impersonal love of humanity and a love of his students and staff), temperance (we never see him overindulge in sensory pleasures), and, presumably, chastity. And Snape, though he lacks brotherly love as it's generally understood, seems to value the WW in an abstract sense, and AFAWK, he is temperate, chaste, and diligent. There many other ideas of goodness or virtue or "manliness" as advocated by the British public schools before WWI. A familiar list of fairly modern virtues can be found in the Boy Scout Law, in which boys promise to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. Eliminating reverent as inapplicable to the WW and obedient as inapplicable to Dumbledore, we could say that DD is (sometimes) helpful, generally friendly courteous, kind, cheerful, brave, and (presumably) clean, whereas (DDM!)Snape (whose position is closer than DD's to the position of a boy, considering that he's 115 years DD's junior and under his command both as staff member and Order member) is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, obedient, and brave. (He may be clean as well--naturally oily hair, you know.) ESE!Snape is, of course, none of these things except helpful and obedient as part of his cover and brave in taking the risk of exposure. Which takes us back to what constitutes goodness for JKR, who may have had some or none of these views of virtue/goodness/manliness in mind when she wrote DD and Snape. Maybe the only virtues she has in mind are courage (demonstrated by both characters) and mercy (demonstrated by DD). I don't think so. The "epitome of goodness" is also wise, in her view (and mine), and tolerant and forgiving. And Snape, for all his faults, is hard-working, often if not always self-controlled (perhaps repressed would be a better word), and, if he's DDM! loyal and trustworthy and obedient, willing to be viewed as a traitor and a murderer if it will serve Dumbledore's cause. I haven't even considered Harry, who certainly is not always kind (or self-controlled or obedient or hard-working or forgiving) and is too young to be wise, but is always courageous and generally loyal, with a young person's sense of justice and fairness. Perhaps he will learn to love people other than his friends, to love the WW enough to save it, faults and all. Perhaps he will learn forgiveness and self-control, to set aside anger and hatred and the desire for revenge. Then perhaps he will be ready to do what is right rather than what is easy, which perhaps is what goodness in JKR's world boils down to, after all. Whatever goodness (or virtue) is for JKR, I don't think it's kindness ("niceness"). Certainly we can't reduce Dumbledore, or Harry, to that one trait or virtue. Both of them are flawed, but both of them are essentially good. (Harry, in becoming a man in more than age, can become even better, with his mind and actions catching up to his heart and soul.) If we want to determine whether Snape is good, it might be best to examine the traits he has in common with DD and Harry rather than focusing on the one virtue, the one component of goodness, that we know he is short on, kindness. Carol, noting that there are other virtues she hasn't even listed, such as patience, that somehow got overlooked by the Greeks, Romans, and Christians but not wanting to bore anyone by giving still more examples From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun May 28 22:34:38 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 22:34:38 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153042 > Magpie: > Yes, I think Draco could easily have gotten an Outstanding in > Potions, because getting an O on an OWL does not, as you seem to be > suggesting, mean he must have been performing miracles and awing the > class, or even that the narrator must be consistently telling us that > Draco's doing really well on this or that Potion. It just means he's > one of the A students in a demanding class. If Draco had been shown > to be having trouble in Potions then yes, I would wonder about him > getting an O, and the narrator would no doubt say how that happened. > But since Draco has consistently been shown to have no trouble in > Potions, which has nothing to do with sucking up to Snape, I see no > reason to think he can't have an O. It's not something the narrator > needed to foreshadow that much. Neri: Perhaps you are drawing on your RL experience here, but it doesn't seem to fit with canon. If it did, then Harry would have had an O in CoMC, which he never had any trouble with, and Hermione would have had an O in DADA. The fact is, the only two O grades that the narrator told us about except for Hermione's are Harry's in DADA and Neville's in Herbology, and in both these cases we were consistently shown that the student has a real flare for the specific subject. Now, had the narrator told us that some of the Ravenclaws have an O in potions without any foreshadowing it would have been perfectly consistent, IMO, because Harry didn't have any opportunity to see them at potions before and wouldn't know about it. But the narrator has given us plenty of information throughout the series about Draco in potions and I'm still waiting for a single canon that he has any flare for the subject. And notably, the narrator *was* consistent in showing Draco sucking up to the teacher. Just five minutes into his first assignment in the NEWT class he tried sucking up to Slughorn. If the narrator can be bothered with foreshadowing and aftershadowing Draco sucking up in potions, surely she can also be bothered with showing he's good at it? > Betsy Hp: > The actual number of students in Harry's class isn't really Flinty, > IMO. *Everything* in canon supports the number being around 40 > total. Neri: Except for JKR herself: **************************************************************** http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-2.htm I never consciously thought, "That's it, that' s all the people in his year," **************************************************************** I believe this statement is canon too. Meta-canon, actually, but meta-canon is still canon. > Betsy Hp: > Speculation is fun, but it is just speculation. If JKR wanted to > show Snape as a dismal failure as a teacher, I doubt she'd have left > it up to readers to make up informational columns in the WW's > newspaper that Hermione chooses to ignore. Neri: Er... this kind of reasoning works in both directions, you know. If JKR wanted to show that Snape's nastiness in class produces results, I doubt she'd have left it up to her readers to calculate the ratio between 10 NEWT students that are never explicitly said to get Os and the total number of students in the year that she admits herself she never consciously thought about. But as you say, speculation is fun . > > >>Betsy Hp: > > > Basically then, you're arguing that all the other students in > > > Harry's class know more about what's going on at Hogwarts than > > > Harry does. > > > >>Neri: > > Yup. Harry never knows about these things. > > > > Betsy Hp: > Really? I'd love some sort of canon on that. Because I don't > recall a time where some massive change occured at Hogwarts and > Harry was clueless, Ron was clueless, and even more importantly, > *Hermione* was clueless, but all the other Hogwarts students of > their class knew exactly what was going on. Neri: Don't you exaggerate a bit with the "massive change"? However, if you really need canon for clueless Ron and Harry, well gee, where to begin? Here's one typical example: *************************************************************** GoF, Ch. 10: "Mum, you've given me Ginny's new dress," said Ron, handing it out to her. "Of course I haven't," said Mrs. Weasley. "That's for you. Dress robes." "What?" said Ron, looking horrorstruck. "Dress robes!" repeated Mrs. Weasley. "It says on your school list that you're supposed to have dress robes this year robes for formal occasions." **************************************************************** Now, can you imagine what would have happened if Mrs. Weasley hadn't spotted this detail in the school list? We would probably have later a conversation at Hogwarts that would go something like this: ************************************************************** GoF, a fanfiction dialogue: McGonagall: Potter -- a word, if you please. Traditionally, the champions and their partners open the Yule ball in their dress robes. Harry: Dress robes? McGonagall: Yes, Potter, dress robes. Robes for formal occasions. Harry: But you see, Professor, I don't have dress robes and Ron doesn't either. We didn't realize... McGonagall: That's not a problem. I'm sure Filch will be able to lend you some. **************************************************************** And naturally, all the *other* students would have their dress robes ready with them, just as they did in the original version of GoF. Including Hermione, who had a smashing dress robe herself and apparently never thought to check with Ron and Harry that they hadn't forgot theirs. But luckily, Harry wasn't supposed to find some old clue in Filch's dress robe, and so Mrs. Weasley was called to the rescue. Neri From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 29 00:30:29 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 00:30:29 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153044 Err..fixing for confusing typos: Neri: Perhaps you are drawing on your RL experience here, but it doesn't seem to fit with canon. If it did, then Harry would have had an O in CoMC, which he never had any trouble with, and Hermione would have had an O in DADA. The fact is, the only two O grades that the narrator told us about except for Hermione's are Harry's in DADA and Neville's in Herbology, and in both these cases we were consistently shown that the student has a real flare for the specific subject. Magpie: No, I'm drawing on canon, with which it fits fine. I saw Harry's OWL grades so accept what I'm told for them. I'm also accepting what seems to be Draco's grades. He's Draco's favorite teacher, and Snape has been shown to be demanding (as is his father) and not to suffer fools well. He shows up in the NEWT class prepared for class. It's a conclusion that's logical and unremarkable. Draco sneers at the idea that "some people got Ds" on their practice OWL and laughs at Harry being in remedial Potions. Snape holds him up as an example the first day. Then he shows up in NEWT Potions with his textbooks in hand. 1+1+1=3. No need for more on top of that. Draco's O has been "foreshadowed" fine. We hear Neville's good in Herbology because he's not good in other subjects and Harry can see it's his hobby, but not all O's have to come with a special story attached. It's just an Outstanding on a test. Good students must just get them regularly and Malfoy getting one in Potions is no surprise. If Snape had been teaching Potions and it required an O I'm quite sure JKR would have still had Malfoy in the class. Neri: And notably, the narrator *was* consistent in showing Draco sucking up to the teacher. Just five minutes into his first assignment in the NEWT class he tried sucking up to Slughorn. If the narrator can be bothered with foreshadowing and aftershadowing Draco sucking up in potions, surely she can also be bothered with showing he's good at it? Magpie: Harry was consistent in describing Draco as sucking up to Snape because Harry sees Draco as a suck up, period, and it adds to Draco's characterization as a villain. (If the sucking up went along with mediocre performance we'd hear about it.) What it's really foreshadowing is the relationship between Draco and Snape in HBP, which is more complicated. I have a hard time imagining Snape's favorite can't pull an O on the OWL. Draco's being competent in his subject is more likely to fuel the favoritism rather than the favoritism fueling his grades. For a kid who is not Harry's friend and in Slytherin I don't think we need more than some references to Draco being cocky and favored; it's not like he has to be the best. I doubt the author thought Malfoy's getting a good grade in his favorite class needed that much defense. In Slughorn's class Draco's trying to win something. That's not "foreshadowing" or "aftershadowing" Draco sucking up in Potions while working at EE level rather than O level. It's Draco trying to get a hold of that liquid luck, Slughorn being a teacher who responds to sucking up. > Betsy Hp: > The actual number of students in Harry's class isn't really Flinty, > IMO. *Everything* in canon supports the number being around 40 > total. Neri: Except for JKR herself: Magpie: Who can't add for toffee, which is why everybody puts her writing skills above her maths skills. Years from now when people read the books they're going to see the suggested 40 students and a random interview where the author said she liked to picture Hogwarts as having however many more students won't mean much. Just as Charlie Weasley will be whatever age canon suggests and not the answer she gave in the interview. Neri: Er... this kind of reasoning works in both directions, you know. If JKR wanted to show that Snape's nastiness in class produces results, I doubt she'd have left it up to her readers to calculate the ratio between 10 NEWT students that are never explicitly said to get Os and the total number of students in the year that she admits herself she never consciously thought about. But as you say, speculation is fun . Magpie: She isn't leaving it to that either. She's characterizing Snape as a tough teacher with high standards without anything or anyone much challenging that in the book. That's far more important in this world than numbers, imo. Neri: Now, can you imagine what would have happened if Mrs. Weasley hadn't spotted this detail in the school list? We would probably have later a conversation at Hogwarts that would go something like this: Magpie: Mrs. Weasley spotted the detail on the school list because it was on the school list, just as the fictitious new NEWT requirements would have been spotted on the school list in HBP if they existed. Hermione may have not thought to mention dress robes, but she would have mentioned NEWT requirments. And she certainly would have mentioned it in retrospect when the boys showed they were clueless, the way she always does when they're clueless about something she knew about all along. She doesn't, they don't, nobody does. We know about the dress robes on the list because it's in canon through the boys learning about it. There is no such scene with Harry and Ron learning about the NEWT announcements. In fact, canon suggests everyone's in the same boat they are. -m From catlady at wicca.net Mon May 29 00:36:08 2006 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 00:36:08 -0000 Subject: Sectumsempra / ChapterDisc / Ogg&Pringle / lots more stuff Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153046 Zanooda wrote in : << Most of the spells are based on Latin, and, if Harry knew it, he could have guessed what the words levicorpus and sectumsempra mean. I know I guessed, and I studied Latin very briefly and 25 years ago. >> I never studied Latin but I like to look up word etymologies, so I knew that 'sect' is cut/separate (dissect, sectarian), so I thought 'Sectumsempra - for enemies' was a spell to make friends into enemies; young Sevvie might have liked to make James and Sirius hate each other ... Anyway, while strongly criticizing Harry for using a spell that he didn't know what it would do, I was just as surprised as Harry at what it did. Darrell wrote in : << Does anyone else think Snape used sectum sempre against James in the pensieve scene? The effects seem similiar. >> Yes, I and several others think so. SSSusan summarized shapter (sorry! couldn't resist) 16 in : << Fred & George do not want to congratulate Ron on achieving A Relationship; they, rather, elect to ask him how the heck he has managed one at all ? did the girl suffer brain damage or something? >> That's the male version of congratulations. << Lav-Lav has given him a gold necklace bearing the words "My Sweetheart." Ron emphatically does not want Fred & George to see it. He admits to Harry that it's mostly just snogging >> I feel so sorry for poor Lavender! I've been there myself... << 2. So what's your best guess of what the twins' attempted Unbreakable Vow was all about? What do you think they tried to get Ron to do? Do you think they understood exactly what they were doing? How do you image these youngsters (they'd have been about 7) would've learned about UVs? >> I figure they would have learned the existence of UVs from overhearing their parents discussing a recent criminal case or scandal or gossip ('Then he made an Unbreakable Vow never to drink alcoholic beverages again, but he did, so of course he died, and then"). Surely that wouldn't have been enough information about HOW to make a UV... Maybe they learned both the existence and some of the method from peeking in the household bookcases that Molly had told them were off limits to pre-teens. If Bill is the right amount older than them, maybe it was Bill's textbooks from learning to be a cursebreaker. << 9. Many people fault Molly (or Molly & Ginny) for not being warm and welcoming with Fleur. Is there anyone who, to the contrary, finds Fleur's behavior in the Christmas Eve scene to be rude ["Eez eet over? Thank goodness, what an `orrible--"]? Or should Molly not have subjected everyone to Celestina Warbeck in the first place? >> I find almost all of Fleur's behavior at the Burrow to be unspeakably rude, and feel very sorry for Molly and Ginny compelled to act calm and polite in her presence despite their red-headed tempers' response to the abuse heaped on them. (However, Fleur talking about the wedding and dressing Ginny and Gabrielle in gold because pink would be 'orrible with Ginny's hair was to me adequately nice and polite behavior.) Even if Fleur learns some manners (not to hit Molly in the face with her silver hair and not to talk through Molly's radio program), the Weasley way of life and the Delacour way of life will never get on. I believe that Bill and Fleur would be well-advised for Bill to resume his old job as cursebreaker in Egypt so they can live and raise their children far from both sets of grand-parents. Altho' when the first kid turns 11, they'll have a truly massive fight about whether to send the children to Hogwarts or Beauxbatons; they may compromise on the Egyptian school of wizardry. Both sets of grand-parents will demand to have the grand-children for Christmas *every* year; they may compromise on alternate years, unless the French wizards make a bigger deal of New Year's Day or Epiphany than they do of Christmas, but I think everyone will be much happier (altho' more unconventional) if Bill and Fleur each spend Christmas with their natal family every year while the children alternate. << Why does Harry like the HBP so much, and why does he *want* him to be his father? >> The Half-Blood Prince's annotated textbook is an enchanted book, and part of the enchantment is that it makes Harry like and trust it. There is no reason young Sevvie would have put such a spell on that book (it wasn't supposed to go out in the world and seduce helpers like The Diary) unless he consciously or unconsciously put the spell on the book while plotting to lend it to someone he was sweet on. If he consciously or unconsciously accompanied that with a spell for the book to seek out the person, if the book mistook Harry for the person, that would explain how the book got out of Snape's bookcase into the Potions classroom cabinet and landed on Harry's desk. If the person Sevvie was sweet on was Lily, the connection could be that Harry has Lily's eyes. There are plenty of other things that give me the feeling that JKR is working up to a big reveal that Sevvie was in love with Lily, altho' I don't want that to be the story. << 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? >> For the ones like Fenrir, they would (as others havE already said) have more victims ... hunting Muggles would be *encouraged*, and wizard folk who had displeased LV might be *given* to them. For the ones who would like to sleep under a roof in a heated room and take a hot bath and eat sweets and learn to use a wand, they know they're not getting it under the current regime, so change the regime ... LV loves to lie, and at least when he was TMR, he did so very convincingly, so he probably promised to give that to them. Carol wrote in : << We know that DD was there to admit eleven-year-old Remus Lupin in that year. Did Ogg and Pringle conveniently retire (or die) that same year? Did Dumbledore ease them out and substitute protected people of his own choice, the half-giant Hagrid and the Squib Filch, at the same time outlawing the old punishments (including whipping, manacles, and possibly Transfiguration)? >> Apparently DD as professor, not yet headmaster, had enough influence to get Hagrid (and possibly Filch) taken on as *assistants* ... I can't find a quote that Molly didn't know Hagrid when she was at Hogwarts, so both Hagrid and Ogg could have been working as gamekeepers when Molly's age-group started at Hogwarts. If Ogg provided enough material for stories in her first year, he could have retired before her second year. Or he could have still been working when Remus's age-group started at Hogwarts, and maybe even when they finished, as long as he was gone by Harry's first year. Pringle was there in Molly's seventh-year (based on my recollection that the late-night stroll was in seventh year) and he might still been there when Remus's age-group started at Hogwarts, but I just got the idea that he retired in disgust when DD abolished the old punishments. If Arthur and Molly are older than Muggles and were married for decades before starting to have children (which is possible if they were saving to buy a house before starting their family), they could have gone to school under a headmaster before Dumbledore -- they could be the same age as McGonagall or Hagrid. But it seems to me that JKR intends them to be the same school year as Lucius (and I'm not sure that works unless Bill was conceived while they were still at school, and even then they'd have to be a pair of Leos and Lucius a Libra or Scorpio), so DD must have been headmaster, so Steve bboyminn must be right about DD didn't abolish the old punishments for like ten years, which seems terribly out of character for him, and this is one long sentence. Elaine wrote in : << On her website, Jo says when referring to the title of HBP: "I was delighted to see that a hard core of super-bright fans knew that the real title was once, in the long distant past, a possibility for 'Chamber of Secrets'" >> When Harry Potter and the CHamber of Secrets was published. Rowling gave publicity interviews to newspapers. Some of the resultant articles said that the working title had been HP & the Half-Blood Prince (one said HP & the Half-Loved Prince). These articles are archived on the Web somewhere, or I would never have seen them, because I didn't join the fun until PoA came out in paperback, Nikkalmati wrote in : << I've seen other listees refer to Peeves as a ghost, but I am not sure if there is any canon for that. I always thought a poltergeist is a different kind or creature entirely, not someone who was once alive. Is there some evidence in the books to the contrary? >> There is canon that poltergeists are NOT ghosts. In PS/SS, when the ickle firsties are waiting to be led into the Great Hall, "About twenty ghosts had just streamed through the back wall. Pearly-white and slightly transparent, they glided across the room talking to one another and hardly glancing at the first years. They seemed to be arguing." (snip) "My dear Friar, haven't we given Peeves all the chances he deserves? He gives us all a bad name and you know, he's not really even a ghost --" Btw, altho' Sir Nick said in OoP that [wizard] people become ghosts because they're afraid of going into the Unknown, I agree with Steve that Myrtle shows no sign of having been *afraid* of the afterlife or lack thereof. It definitely seems to me that her 'unfinished business' was desire to torment Olive Hornby rather than fear. Leslie41 wrote in : << [Snape's] apparent "meanness" in refusing to call on [Hermione], and discouraging her from being so eager all the time, is to give the other students a chance to participate and learn as well. >> Dear gods, I wish I were half as smart as Hermione. I have a low opinion of Mensa because *I* meet the admission requirements (770 V 700 M on the old 800 point SAT in 1974) and I'm nothing special except that I like books. But even mere me learned from second through twelfth grade that most teachers are CRUEL to smart kids because they HATE smart kids because, most teachers being terribly average themselves, they're JEALOUS of smart kids. By eighth grade, the smart kids are catching the teachers in outright, provable errors -- provable by reference to the textbook, or pointing out that 3 times 3 is not equal 6 like the teacher wrote on the board. The purpose of public school is to enforce equality by beating the intelligent and even the average students down to the level of the Educable Mentally Retarded (as they were called in my day). Getting back on topic, I cannot understand why Snape hates Hermione. The kind of student he likes should be *exactly* her: she's intelligent like him, respectful of him, attentive to his lectures, careful with the potion ingredients, and truly interested in Potions. I can't understand Snape hating smart kids, nor being so committed to House loyalty or racism that he'd hate a Gryffindor or a Muggle-born for not being stupid like they're 'supposed' to be. Tonks_op wrote in : << Tonks and Lupin will marry and live happily ever after. .... >> Wasn't it you, Tonks, who explained that Snape and Lupin will die for Harry's sake, together, probably by beheading, because they represent the Black King and Grey King of alchemy, and that you were glad Lupin was the Grey King because the Grey King has a young and joyful wife, and that was before HBP came out and revealed (or confirmed, to those who had predicted it) that Nymphadora was chasing him? In which case, they will marry and live happily until some time in book 7. Jeannette wrote in : << obviously [Lupin] is a very competant wizard. Why are his clothes always worn or a bit ragged? Can't he do a repair spell? >> I believe that Molly is a very competent witch, but she and her husband are always wearing shabby robes, and she didn't do anything to fix Ron's horrible second-hand dress robes. I get this feeling that 'Reparo' works on glass and ceramic and maybe wood, stone, metal, but a repair spell for clothing has not yet been invented. Or if spells for clothing *have* been invented, they have been suppressed or kept as trade secrets by the Clothiers' Guild. In PS/SS, we saw Madam Malkin pinning up the hem of Harry's new robe by hand, while one of her journeywomen did the same for Draco. Pinning hems is probably the most annoying part of the whole annoying art of making clothes, so *I* would want to just point a wand at the bottom of the robe worn by the boy on the chair, and have the cloth fold itself up so that the hemline is the right length. But possibly in the back room of the shop, where customers can't see, they have spools that thread the needles upon the word of command, and needles that sew a fine seam with no hand guiding them. Or maybe they just have House Elves sewing. (canon reference: GoF chapter 4: "Harry ... had rarely seen Mr or Mrs Weasley wearing anything that the Dursleys would call "normal". Their children might don Muggle clothing during the holidays, but Mr and Mrs Weasley usually wore long robes in varying states of shabbiness." Sandy wrote in : << We know that there are no higher institutes of learning in the WW. It's not like you graduate from Hogwarts and then go on to wizard's college. So what qualifies someone to teach (or be a Healer or any other profession for that matter)? >> When Arthur is in St Mungo's in OoP, UK hardcover p430: "the second door on the right bore the words:'Dangerous' Dai Llewellyn Ward. Serious Bites.* Underneath this was a card in a brass holder on which had been handwritten: *Healer-in-Charge: Hippocrates Smethwyck. Trainee Healer: Augustus Pye*' >From this, I deduce that people who want to be Healers apply for training either to St. Mungo's as an institution, to the Healers' Guild as an institution (which might be the same thing), or to a Master Healer individually. I believe very much that there is a Guild system which teaches by apprenticeship, and in most Guilds the apprentice makes a contract to be trained by one Master until ready to take the Guild's proficiency exam to be a journeyman. Masters can assign book study and lab exercises as well as working in the shop, and Guilds can supply a little or a lot of classroom teaching that Masters can send their Apprentices to. I think there are some Guilds where trainees are Apprenticed to the whole Guild instead of to one Master, and their training is based on classroom instruction, with the hands-on being circulated among different Masters. The 20th-century university model of Bachelor, Thesis, Master, Dissertation, and Doctor is based on the Guild system ('collegium' is Latin for guild), with undergraduates the equivalent of apprentices, graduates the equivalent of Journeymen, the doctoral dissertation the equivalent of a masterpiece, and a PhD the equivalent of a Master, so I believe that young Snape, as an apprentice in the Potioneers Guild, was a grad student in Potions Research. TOnks_op wrote in : << We know that Ginny is the 7th daughter of the 7th daughter. >> We do? We apparently know that Ginny is a 7th child, and her father is one of three brothers with no sisters. (Reference: ) Ginny's mother had two brothers (Fabian and Gideon) famously killed by Death Eaters. What do we know about her other siblings? Btw, if Draco could quote his father saying that 'all the Weasleys' had too many children, surely each of those three Weasley brothers must have had at least four children. Where are Ron's at least 8 red-haired cousins who should be at Hogwarts or in adult life? Betsey Hp wrote in : << What we *have* seen is pressure to join the Ministry, and we've seen that this is where ambitious characters tend to go, or get told to go. Potions isn't a requirement in this case. >> Just a little nitpick: I would think that whether a Potions NEWT is a requirement would depend on which entry-level job at the Ministry the ambitious character is aiming toward. Auror is a job at the Ministry which can be the start of a career culminating in becoming Minister for Magic. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 00:39:56 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 00:39:56 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153047 > Neri: > And notably, the narrator *was* consistent in showing Draco sucking up > to the teacher. Just five minutes into his first assignment in the > NEWT class he tried sucking up to Slughorn. If the narrator can be > bothered with foreshadowing and aftershadowing Draco sucking up in > potions, surely she can also be bothered with showing he's good at it? Alla: Hehe. Me too, Neri, me too. :-) > > Betsy Hp: > > Really? I'd love some sort of canon on that. Because I don't > > recall a time where some massive change occured at Hogwarts and > > Harry was clueless, Ron was clueless, and even more importantly, > > *Hermione* was clueless, but all the other Hogwarts students of > > their class knew exactly what was going on. > > Neri: > Don't you exaggerate a bit with the "massive change"? However, if you > really need canon for clueless Ron and Harry, well gee, where to > begin? Here's one typical example: > Alla: Well, mine is not exactly an example of Harry not knowing everything that whole school knows, but it is certainly an example of Harry with all his "personal Dumbledore's connections" knowing significantly less than Malfoy does. "A gleeful smile spread across Malfoy's pale face. "Don't tell me you don't know?" he said delightefully. "You've got a father and a brother at the ministry and you don't even know? My god, my father told me about it ages ago... heard it from Cornelius Fudge. But then, father is always associated with the top people at the ministry" - GoF, p.169, paperback. I mean not that I ever doubted that Malfoy's connections allow him to be much more in on a lot of important information than Harry, but it also IMO shows that a lot of kids ( or at least some) whose parents are connected with the ministry knew about Tournament much earlier than either Harry or Ron did. > Magpie: >> Draco sneers at the idea that "some people got Ds" on their practice > OWL and laughs at Harry being in remedial Potions. Alla: That would fit just as well with Draco getting an EE, IMO, since it is still so much better than D and Draco can sneer too, > Magpie: > I have a hard time imagining Snape's > favorite can't pull an O on the OWL. Draco's being competent in his > subject is more likely to fuel the favoritism rather than the > favoritism fueling his grades. Alla: Why? You don't think that especially in light of close relationships Snape has with Malfoy family as we see in HBP, Snape favors Draco for the reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with his grades, but have everything to do with his close relationship with Malfoys, not vice versa? Now, Mcgonagall obviously favors Hermione for the reasons that have everything to do with her grades, IMO. I see no signs of Draco good work in Potions an especially in light of HBP I think that his favoritism is just that - favoritism and the most unfair brand of such, IMO. One accident of Malfoy doing well in Potions, just one is enough for me to show that he indeed knows the subject. I do not remember any. JMO, Alla, who loved Neri's post once again. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 00:55:51 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 00:55:51 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153048 Neri wrote: > Now, had the narrator told us that some of the Ravenclaws have an O in potions without any foreshadowing it would have been perfectly consistent, IMO, because Harry didn't have any opportunity to see them at potions before and wouldn't know about it. But the narrator has given us plenty of information throughout the series about Draco in potions and I'm still waiting for a single canon that he has any flare for the subject. Carol: True, we haven't seen the Ravenclaws or Ernie Macmillan in Potions class, but Ravenclaws are known for being intelligent, and Ernie is a hard worker, who was spending a minimum of seven hours a night studying for his OWLs. It's no surprise that he would receive an OWL under such conditions. As for Draco and his two fellow Slytherins, we have first of all the negative evidence that their potions in Snape's class are never described as falling below Snape's standards. Harry's, Ron's, Neville's, and Goyle's are often described, but never Draco's, Theo's, or Blaise's. If their potions had exploded or given off smoke or a foul smell, the Gryffindors certainly would have noticed, as they notice Goyle's. And here's your single bit of canon that Draco has any flair for the subject. In the very first Potions class, Snape is "just telling everyone to look at the perfect way Malfoy had stewed his horned slugs" when Neville somehow melts Seamus's cauldron (139). So any favoritism Snape shows to Draco is partly based on, and reinforced by, Draco's Potions abilities. Snape would not favor a "dunderhead," no matter whose son he was (he "criticiz[es] almost everyone except Malfoy," meaning Slytherins as well as Gryffindors. SS Am. ed. 119). Neri: > I believe this statement [JKR's uncertainty in an interview wheterh her forty students are all there is] is canon too. Meta-canon, actually, but meta-canon is still canon. Carol: Maybe. But the evidence in the books is canon-canon, so to speak. It's there on the page. Ten kids each from Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, and Slytherin per the number of brooms, cauldrons, earmuffs, etc. (Lupin's DADA class in CoS, which consists only of Gryffindors, also seems to have only ten students, based on the number of Boggarts described.) The only unknown is the number of students in Ravenclaw, but the Sorting Hat talks in OoP about "quartering" the students every year, and it would be extremely unusual for the intelligent students (Ravenclaw) to outnumber the ordinary ones (Hufflepuff). "The sorting Hat" chapter in SS/PS gives us four Ravenclaw names (Terry Boot, Mandy Brocklehurst, Padma Patil (referred to only by her last name, but we we know her placement from GoF), and Lisa Turpin, and we later add Michael Corner and Anthony Goldstein to the list of Ravenclaws in Harry's year. Although there are gaps in the names called in the Sorting Hat chapter (for Crabbe and Goyle, for example, are named as Slytherins but we don't see them sitting under the Hat), the distribution of the twenty-four students actually named (if I counted correctly) seems to be roughly equal, and we know that JKR's forty named students were equally divided, five boys and five girls to each House. All the available canon evidence (except for the odd and inconsistent "thirty students" in Umbridge's DADA class in OoP) indicates that the forty students JKR created for Harry's year are the only ones who exist. Neri: If JKR wanted to show that Snape's nastiness in class produces results, doubt she'd have left it up to her readers to calculate the ratio between 10 NEWT students that are never explicitly said to get Os and the total number of students in the year that she admits herself she never consciously thought about. Carol: But there's no need for any such speculation. All we need to do is to accept Snape's statement that he accepts only O students into NEWT Potions and accept the fact that the other ten students came prepared as meaning that they received the O and there's no difficulty. We don't need to invent imaginary messages that Harry and Ron never received to account for the presence of ten other students. They're the ones who benefited from Snape's teaching and/or had an aptitude for Potions in the first place and received O's (a high "high-pass rate," certainly, but Snape has stated that he consistently has exactly that). As far as the notices that you speculate were sent out to the students who received E's on their Potions OWLs are concerned, both Harry and Ron would certainly have received one along with their OWL results and/or their booklists if such notices existed since Horace Slughorn is already the Potions master at this point. Neither receives any such notice, but Dumbledore does tell Harry, who thinks he won't be taking Potions because he knows he didn't receive an O, not to count his OWLs before they're delivered (HBP Am. ed. 79), indicating that DD intends to make sure that Harry gets into Slughorn's class (and perhaps anticipates that Harry will take Ron along with him). No other student is under DD's watchful eye and has the benefit of this understandable and necessary favoritism. The evidence we have indicates that the students (other than Harry and Ron) who are in Potions are there because they received an O *and* because they want to be. Not every student likes Potions (many could have been turned off to it because Snape taught it or because they have no aptitude or because it isn't as much fun as "silly wand waving"), and only two careers that we know of require it at the NEWT level: Auror and Healer. Students who received an E *may* have discovered that they could take it on the first day of classes (we don't know that anyone besides Harry and Ron received this information) but opted not to do so because they had already made other plans. The students we see in Slughorn's class, OTOH, must have planned to take it all along as they have their books, scales, potions kits, and cauldrons. (Harry threw his cauldron into his trunk with his other belongings, possibly because he didn't want to leave it at the Dursleys, but he doesn't have any other Potions equipment with him.) Only Harry and Ron have to use borrowed books and Slughorn's own supplies. (I guess Ron brought his cauldron, too, or borrowed one--JKR evidently doesn't notice such small details.) Regarding the number of students in the class as compared with those in other classes, we seem to have ten O students and two E students, with the rest of the E students not opting to take Potions and perhaps not even knowing that they have that option. That really is the only explanation that fits the canon evidence and doesn't require speculative messages that neither Harry nor Ron received. Snape's NEWT DADA class, unlike what would have been his NEWT Potions class, has at your estimate about 25 students(IIRC), about twice as mnay as Slughorn's Potions class. No credit for this number can be given to the previous DADA teacher, Dolores Umbridge, and only a little, perhaps, to Lupin and possibly Crouch!Moody (though I'm not sure what he did besides cast Unforgiveable Curses on spiders). Most of the credit goes to Harry, who taught approximately half the class in the DA. It seems likely that most of these students, like Ron and Hermione, received E's in DADA. The other students, including Draco Malfoy and other Slytherins, must have passed the OWL without Harry's help. Clearly, they didn't receive O's (Harry seems to be the only student in his year who did so), and they weren't in the DA, so it seems unlikely that they got E's. How, then, did they get in? It seems to me that Snape has different expectations for his Potions students than his DADA students (who have not, in any case, had him as their DADA teacher). Clearly, he is not taking "only the very best," or his NEWT DADA class would consist of Harry. We know that he has revised his standards to include E students as well as his one O student. But if everyone in the NEWT DADA class except Harry received an E, that's an unusually large number of E's, especially since about half the students, according to Harry, weren't in the DA. Both the rather large number of students and the presence of students who were not in the DA can be explained if Snape has lowered his standards still further to admit anyone who *passed* the DADA OWL (meaning that they received an O, an E, or an A) into the class. Why would Snape do that? Simple. He knows that Voldemort is back and that all of the students, not just "the very best," will need to defend themselves against the Death Eaters and Dark creatures. (Even Crabbe and Goyle appear to be taking remedial DADA, ostensibly so that they can pass the OWL the second time.) DADA is not Potions, an elite subject that only a few people need, one for which Snape has the luxury of teaching only the students with an aptitude for it at the NEWT level. *All* of the students need DADA, especially now with Voldermort returning, and Snape has to make sure they all learn what they should have learned from Umbridge, as well as whatever he can teach them regarding the Unforgiveable Curses, Dark creatures, along with in-class practice using nonverbal spells. The class may very well contain 38 out of 40 students (everyone except Crabbe and Goyle), not because Snape was a bad Potions teacher and Umbridge (or Harry) was a good DADA teacher, but because Snape is making sure that every student in the school learns what he or she needs to learn in the short time available before school is out. And he surely knows, too, that his own time to teach them is limited because of the DADA curse. Carol, who can't imagine Snape making the Gryffindors. Ravenclaws, and Hufflepuffs learn to cast nonverbal spells if he's ESE! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 01:12:58 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 01:12:58 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153049 > Carol: > And here's your single bit of canon that Draco has any flair for the > subject. In the very first Potions class, Snape is "just telling > everyone to look at the perfect way Malfoy had stewed his horned > slugs" when Neville somehow melts Seamus's cauldron (139). So any > favoritism Snape shows to Draco is partly based on, and reinforced by, > Draco's Potions abilities. Snape would not favor a "dunderhead," no > matter whose son he was (he "criticiz[es] almost everyone except > Malfoy," meaning Slytherins as well as Gryffindors. SS Am. ed. 119). > Alla: Let's talk some more about Draco's cutting skills. I am really not sure that Snape is being truthful here or that Draco is always a perfect cutter ( meaning an "O" level cutter). Remember Draco showing up after his injury in Potions class and making Ron cutting his ingredients for him? I mean, Snape made him on Draco's request, but that is not very relevant for my purposes. Now, if Malfoy was truly unable to cut here, that would be a different story, but we KNOW Draco is faking and he does not hide it from Harry or the reader. So, that tells me ( IMO of course) that Draco is not really comfortable in his Potion making or cutting skills if he is so glad to make Ron do it. I mean of course Draco is glad to make Ron do it out of malice, but would he risk to let someone who is obviously beneath him to make preparations for his Potion? Does it make sense? Alla From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon May 29 01:58:06 2006 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (Neri) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 01:58:06 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153050 > Magpie: > Harry was consistent in describing Draco as sucking up to Snape > because Harry sees Draco as a suck up, period, and it adds to Draco's > characterization as a villain. (If the sucking up went along with > mediocre performance we'd hear about it.) Neri: I've just now remembered ? stupid of me to forget it ? in fact the narrator shows Draco to be sucking up not only before the OWLs to Snape and after the OWLs to Slughorn, but even *during* the OWLs: ******************************************************************* OotP, Ch. 31: Meanwhile, Draco Malfoy had found a different way to induce panic. "Of course, it's not what you know," he was heard to tell Crabbe and Goyle loudly outside Potions a few days before the exams were to start, "it's who you know. Now, Father's been friendly with the head of the Wizarding Examinations Authority for years ? old Griselda Marchbanks ? we've had her round for dinner and everything..." ******************************************************************* Now, I know about this "unreliable narrator" argument that can be used to contradict practically anything, but this is too much. Are you saying that Harry just imagined that he heard these words? Ron, Hermione and Neville hear them too, and they discuss them. Are they too unreliable? The fact is, the narrator (not Harry) very consistently characterizes Draco throughout the series as the sucking up student. Not just to Snape. Also to McGonagall (when he frames the trio in SS/PS), to old Marchbanks, and to Slughorn. In fact, this characterization is so consistent that if I were *explicitly* told in canon that Draco has an O in his Potions OWL, my first and automatic thought would be that his father indeed managed to bribe someone in the Examinations Authority. Now, it *is* in principle possible that a sucking up student would also be a good student, but it is not very likely. If you're really good at something you don't usually need to suck up, and you'd want to take the challenge and prove that you can do it without the sucking up. Had the narrator made any attempt to show us, just once, that Draco is indeed good at potions *independently* of his sucking up relationship with Snape, I would be ready to consider it. But as it is, the narrator practically prevents me, with Draco's words above, from believing that he could have achieved an O in his OWL in any fair way. > Magpie: > She isn't leaving it to that either. She's characterizing Snape as a > tough teacher with high standards without anything or anyone much > challenging that in the book. Neri: I'm not challenging that, although I'd say you still need to explain what does Snape have against Hermione, the best student in his class. What I do challenge is the claim that Snape's style of teaching, while being very nasty to some students, at least produces results. Of course, anybody is entitled to his own opinion regarding the results that such teachers produce in RL, but within the story, I don't see JKR suggesting it in regard to Snape, nor in regard to any other teacher. If at all, she suggests the very opposite. Neri From celizwh at intergate.com Mon May 29 02:01:59 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 02:01:59 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153051 a_svirn: > This is a serious accusation to saddle the Hufflepuffs > with. And for the life of me I don't see how it can > be the other side of the "fair play" coin. Far from > "abdicating the responsibility for thinking for oneself" > fairmindedness implies the ability and determination to > judge for oneself. houyhnhnm: I have been intrigued by Rowling's statement that the four houses represent the four elements. In astrology, each of the three signs associated with a particular element has its negative and positive expression, but no sign is superior to any other. Rowling has shown us good and bad Gryffindors, and bad Slytherins. She has implied that there are good Slytherins and she has also implied that no house is superior to any other. So what would a "bad" Hufflepuff trait be if not conformity? (I should have used the word "conformity" rather than "mediocrity". It is closer to what I was trying to say.) What is a "bad" Ravenclaw like? We know the virtues of the other two houses. What are their vices? I am open to suggestions. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon May 29 02:41:54 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 02:41:54 -0000 Subject: Sectumsempra / ChapterDisc / Ogg&Pringle / lots more stuff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153052 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > Tonks_op wrote in > : > > << Tonks and Lupin will marry and live happily ever after. .... >> > Catlady Replied: > Wasn't it you, Tonks, who explained that Snape and Lupin will die for Harry's sake, together, probably by beheading, because they represent the Black King and Grey King of alchemy, and that you were glad Lupin was the Grey King because the Grey King has a young and joyful wife, and that was before HBP came out and revealed (or confirmed, to those who had predicted it) that Nymphadora was chasing him? In which case, they will marry and live happily until some time in book 7. Tonks: No, that wasn't me!!!!!!!!! Don't know who it was, but I don't get into the alchemical symbolism very much. I do think that Snape will die, but not beheading! Weird. > > TOnks_op wrote in > : > > << We know that Ginny is the 7th daughter of the 7th daughter. >> Catlady replied: > We do? We apparently know that Ginny is a 7th child, (Snip) Tonks: Well, I could be wrong. I thought I heard that somewhere. Maybe it was just speculation on this list. But JKR's website does say that she is the first girl in several generation. Tonks_op From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 29 02:59:21 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 22:59:21 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers References: Message-ID: <00de01c682cb$e2f5cf50$0c6c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 153053 Alla: > > Let's talk some more about Draco's cutting skills. I am really not > sure that Snape is being truthful here or that Draco is always a > perfect cutter ( meaning an "O" level cutter). > > Remember Draco showing up after his injury in Potions class and > making Ron cutting his ingredients for him? I mean, Snape made him > on Draco's request, but that is not very relevant for my purposes. > > Now, if Malfoy was truly unable to cut here, that would be a > different story, but we KNOW Draco is faking and he does not hide it > from Harry or the reader. > > So, that tells me ( IMO of course) that Draco is not really > comfortable in his Potion making or cutting skills if he is so glad > to make Ron do it. > > I mean of course Draco is glad to make Ron do it out of malice, but > would he risk to let someone who is obviously beneath him to make > preparations for his Potion? Magpie: Yes, he would risk someone beneath him doing his preparation in this scene, because it's all about the malice and bugging Ron and he's not losing anything by it. The scene never brought any doubts about Draco's cutting skills to my mind. Anything wrong with Draco's Potion is going to be blamed on Ron. Neri: I've just now remembered - stupid of me to forget it - in fact the narrator shows Draco to be sucking up not only before the OWLs to Snape and after the OWLs to Slughorn, but even *during* the OWLs: ******************************************************************* OotP, Ch. 31: Meanwhile, Draco Malfoy had found a different way to induce panic. "Of course, it's not what you know," he was heard to tell Crabbe and Goyle loudly outside Potions a few days before the exams were to start, "it's who you know. Now, Father's been friendly with the head of the Wizarding Examinations Authority for years - old Griselda Marchbanks - we've had her round for dinner and everything..." ******************************************************************* Now, I know about this "unreliable narrator" argument that can be used to contradict practically anything, but this is too much. Are you saying that Harry just imagined that he heard these words? Ron, Hermione and Neville hear them too, and they discuss them. Are they too unreliable? Magpie: No, they're not unreliable. That's not Draco sucking up that's Draco doing exactly what the text says he's doing. He's finding a new way to induce panic in other students. In case a reader actually thought Draco's boasts were actually true here, Neville's line about Marchbanks is there to indicate he is lying. Draco does that. Neri: The fact is, the narrator (not Harry) very consistently characterizes Draco throughout the series as the sucking up student. Not just to Snape. Also to McGonagall (when he frames the trio in SS/PS), to old Marchbanks, and to Slughorn. Magpie: Draco has never been shown to get any advantage in his grades due to his behavior towards any teacher whatsoever. Hermione's a brown noser. Does that indicate that she didn't get her grades fairly? Neri: In fact, this characterization is so consistent that if I were *explicitly* told in canon that Draco has an O in his Potions OWL, my first and automatic thought would be that his father indeed managed to bribe someone in the Examinations Authority. Magpie: Well, you've made it pretty clear that you're opposed to the idea of Malfoy getting an O on his OWL and fanwanking a bribe isn't much more difficult than fanwanking a secret announcement to get the result that fits the conclusion you want. Neri: Had the narrator made any attempt to show us, just once, that Draco is indeed good at potions *independently* of his sucking up relationship with Snape, I would be ready to consider it. Magpie: So, had the narrator made any attempt to show us, just once, that Draco is any good at Potions outside of the number of suggestions he's good at Potions that are actually in canon you'd be ready to consider it. But as it is, we're stuck explaining away everything that's there because Draco shouldn't be good at Potions. Neri: But as it is, the narrator practically prevents me, with Draco's words above, from believing that he could have achieved an O in his OWL in any fair way. Magpie: Are you honestly telling me that you didn't get that that line of Draco's is about Draco blowing hot air to scare other students? Even with Neville following it up by saying that his family is friends with Marchbanks and she never speaks about the Malfoys? You think Marchbanks was in the Malfoy's pocket? Neri: I'm not challenging that, although I'd say you still need to explain what does Snape have against Hermione, the best student in his class. Magpie: That she's a know it all with a personality that annoys him. I believe he's said as much. Neri: What I do challenge is the claim that Snape's style of teaching, while being very nasty to some students, at least produces results. I don't see JKR suggesting it in regard to Snape, nor in regard to any other teacher. If at all, she suggests the very opposite. Magpie: You're free to challenge it as a teaching style in the real world, and I don't think JKR is particularly promoting Snape's style of teaching, but I don't see any evidence that Snape is a complete failure at teaching within the books. He's not teacher of the year, but he gets the results he gets. -m From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 03:09:53 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 03:09:53 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: <00de01c682cb$e2f5cf50$0c6c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153054 > Neri: > But as it is, the narrator practically prevents me, with Draco's words > above, from believing that he could have achieved an O in his OWL in any > fair way. > > Magpie: > Are you honestly telling me that you didn't get that that line of Draco's is > about Draco blowing hot air to scare other students? Even with Neville > following it up by saying that his family is friends with Marchbanks and she > never speaks about the Malfoys? You think Marchbanks was in the Malfoy's > pocket? > Alla: No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , would she mention it to her friend? I mean, why share the fact that you are being bribed with your friend? Neville does not say that it does not happen, he just says that she never mentions Malfoys. I mean it is POSSIBLE of course, but if I were to decide ( God forbid) that I am going to take bribe from anybody, believe me, I would NOT mention that to anybody, ever. If for nothing else, then for the fear that my friend would I don't know be more law abiding citisen than me and would go to authorities. So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to me. JMO, Alla From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 29 04:00:14 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 00:00:14 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers References: Message-ID: <010601c682d4$64836c50$0c6c400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 153055 > Magpie: > Are you honestly telling me that you didn't get that that line of Draco's > is > about Draco blowing hot air to scare other students? Even with > Neville > following it up by saying that his family is friends with Marchbanks and > she > never speaks about the Malfoys? You think Marchbanks was in the > Malfoy's > pocket? > Alla: No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , would she mention it to her friend? Magpie: If Marchbanks was in the Malfoy's pocket I think it would be dealt with in a storyline, most probably by the end of OotP. I really think Malfoy was just scaring other students. Alla: I mean it is POSSIBLE of course, but if I were to decide ( God forbid) that I am going to take bribe from anybody, believe me, I would NOT mention that to anybody, ever. If for nothing else, then for the fear that my friend would I don't know be more law abiding citisen than me and would go to authorities. So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to me. Magpie: The line doesn't literally prove that it couldn't happen, but it doesn't really have to because it comes to nothing. It's like using Ron's monologues where he's going over his great Quidditch being evidence that Ron's a great Quidditch player and all his problems are part of some conspiracy plot. I think it's just a Malfoy character moment and introduces Marchbanks name. -m From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 29 04:00:42 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 04:00:42 -0000 Subject: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers (was: Re: Hagrid and Snape...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153056 Carol: > Both the rather large number of students and the presence of students > who were not in the DA can be explained if Snape has lowered his > standards still further to admit anyone who *passed* the DADA OWL > (meaning that they received an O, an E, or an A) into the class. Potioncat: Me too. What? You want more? I think DADA is required for all students. Crabbe and Goyle are taking some sort of DADA class because Snape uses their marks as a reason to give them detention, and he says they will be taking DADA OWLs again. So we know they didnt' pass, but that they are preparing for the OWL test. Draco is in the same class as Harry, although he thinks DADA is a joke. Fred and George, who scaped 6 OWLS between them, are both taking DADA in their 6th year. They talk about Moody as a teacher. Snape says in his first class, "Given this confusion I am surprised so many of you scraped an O.W.L. in this subject. I shall be even more surprised if all of you manage to keep up with the N.E.W.T. work, which will be much more advanced." It sounds to me as if the requirement for DADA NEWT was a passing OWL grade and that there is some sort of remedial DADA as well. Of course, it also sounds to me that Snape was complimenting Harry on a job well done. I doubt Harry noticed. As for Draco sucking up. Well, when is it networking and when is it sucking up? (Yeah, I think he's a suck up too.) But, Neri suggested that more students should want to take Potions with Slughorn because he can help with connections. So, is it ok to suck up erm network, or not? In the case when Snape told Ron to chop the ingredients for Draco two things were going on. Draco was pretending to be injured and for some reason Snape was going along with it. Or Snape didn't know he was pretending. (I'm not sure how he got away it with it across the board.) At any rate, a teacher tells student A to prepare something for student B. Student A obviously does a poor job of it. The teacher is correct in making student A give the better preparation to student B. Here we also see that Ron does a good job at preparing ingredients. Not that I blame Ron, you understand, but I think McGonagall would have done the same thing as Snape did. From puduhepa98 at aol.com Mon May 29 04:21:05 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 00:21:05 EDT Subject: Nice vs Good - Compassion Message-ID: <495.123ede3.31abd0b1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153057 > > Lanval: > > Can you name one of those acts? > >Lanval >Next -- at the end of HBP, which you mentioned in another post. Snape >yells at the DEs to leave Potter for LV, right? . >Until we know beyond any doubt what Snape's role was in that book, >and whether he's only acting the DE here, I will not pass judgment. >Besides, strictly speaking, Snape does not save Harry 's life -- the >DE is 'only' using the Cruciatus Curse. > > Leslie41: > If one defines "compassion" as the awareness of suffering and the > wish to stop it, or to prevent it, I can name many. Starting with > his work as a spy, and his attempts to save Harry's life. > >.Pippin >Snape seems almost incapable of compassion, which makes him such a pain to be around, while Lupin is an extremely compassionate man. Nikkalmati: I can think of several acts of compassion on Snape's part beginning with Spinners End where he certainly had compassion on Narcissa when she went all weepy on him. He also had compassion on Draco, when Harry performed the Sacrumsempra curse on him and Snape healed him. Both of these acts of compassion were directed toward a Malfoy for reasons that we probably will understand better in the future. He may display compassion for Ginny, when she is taken by the Basilisk, if the clutching of the back of the chair means he is concerned for her. Lupin states that he is grateful to Snape because he made the Wolfsbane potion perfectly for him every time. This statement implies that it would be possible to make it but not well so that Lupin would partially transform or suffer from side effects. (You could also argue that Snape would not make a potion less than perfectly to save his soul, so this was not an act of compassion) . When he returned Harry and Sirius on stretchers to the castle in POA, he displayed compassion. He could have just left Sirius there lying by the lake, couldn't he? Maybe the Dementors would have come back and Sirius would have ceased to be a problem. What duty did Snape have to him at that point? Maybe Snape saw how he had protected the Trio (and Snape) from Lupin and felt some compassion for Sirius. I don't think we have to know Snape's "true" loyalties to see the events in HBP as compassionate. There is no reason why a DE could not give Harry a little Crucio even if LV forbid anyone else to kill Harry. Snape did not just tell the DEs not to Crucio Harry, he appears to have blocked the spell after it had begun. I can't really think of any reason for Snape to do that except to spare Harry unnecessary pain. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 05:17:21 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 05:17:21 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153058 Magpie wrote: > > Are you honestly telling me that you didn't get that that line of Draco's is about Draco blowing hot air to scare other students? Even with Neville following it up by saying that his family is friends with Marchbanks and she never speaks about the Malfoys? You think Marchbanks was in the Malfoy's pocket? > > > > Alla responded: > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I > mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , > would she mention it to her friend? > Neville does not say that it does not happen, he just says that she > never mentions Malfoys. > So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's > pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to > me. Carol responds: My curling iron is heating, List Elves! I can't let this one pass. Let's look at who Madam Marchbanks is, and what she does and says, before we assume that she's in a little braggart's pocket and is in any way subject to a fifteen-year-old boy's influence, or that of his coin-jingling father. Madam Marchbanks, along with Tiberius Ogden, resigned her office in the Wizengamot to protest the appointment of Dolores Umbridge as High Inquisitor at Hogwarts. The first thing she does when Umbridge greets her is ask where Dumbledore is: "'Now I haven't heard from Dumbledore lately!' she added, peering around the hall as though hopeful he might suddenly emerge from a broom cupboard. 'No idea where he is, I suppose?'" (OoP Am. ed. 710-11). She's a friend of Augusta Longbottom, Neville's grandmother, who whatever her faults is another Dumbledore loyalist ("My gran says that's rubbish," Neville says after Seamus implies that the Daily Prophet's stories about DD are true, 219). The Prophet attacks Madam Marchbanks, too, saying that she has links to "subversive goblin groups"--goblin groups that oppose the Ministry's repressive policies, possibly? It is most unlikely that this brave and ancient witch is a friend of the Malfoys or in their pocket. Draco is either "inducing panic," as the narrator, reflecting Harry's viewpoint, indicates, or he is just blowing hot air. Madam Marchbanks tells Umbridge that she examined Dumbledore in his Charms and Transfiguration NEWTs and that he "did things with a wand [she'd] never seen before," (711). She supervises the Potions exam, in which Harry and Ron receive E's and Hermione an O. These are, as far as can be determined, the marks they deserve. Whatever Draco's mark, and it seems to be an O, it is almost certainly the mark he deserves. It is no fault of Professor Marchbanks' that Harry fails Divination after telling her that she "would shortly be meeting a round, dark, soggy stranger" (717), or that the Astronomy exam, which she proctors with Professor Tofty (another friend of Tiberius Ogden's and therefore probably of Dumbledore) is interrupted by Umbridge's attack on Hagrid, causing him to lose concentration and then stop working completely. There is no indication of unfairness or a connection with the Malfoys on the part of Professor Marchbanks, who seems to be a person of remarkable integrity and courage. Carol, who thinks that a friend of Dumbledore's who opposes the Umbridge Inquisition should not be judged on the words of Draco Malfoy From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 29 06:34:14 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 06:34:14 -0000 Subject: Sectumsempra / ChapterDisc / Ogg&Pringle / lots more stuff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > Zanooda wrote in > : > > << Most of the spells are based on Latin, and, if Harry knew it, he > could have guessed what the words levicorpus and sectumsempra mean. I > know I guessed, and I studied Latin very briefly and 25 years ago. >> > > I never studied Latin but I like to look up word etymologies, so I > knew that 'sect' is cut/separate (dissect, sectarian), so I thought > 'Sectumsempra - for enemies' was a spell to make friends into enemies; > young Sevvie might have liked to make James and Sirius hate each other > ... Anyway, while strongly criticizing Harry for using a spell that he > didn't know what it would do, I was just as surprised as Harry at what > it did. Geoff: I have previously commented somewhere that my take on 'sectumsempra' was that it was derived from 'sectum' which is part of the verb 'seco' (= to cut) and 'semper' meaning 'always' or 'forever' hinting that the spell creates permanent cuts. From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon May 29 06:37:25 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 06:37:25 -0000 Subject: Harry's death and Snape's nonexistent sacrifice In-Reply-To: <47f.196325f.31ab32ba@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153060 Julie wrote: > I've seen this theory before, that > Harry will die and rejoin his loved > ones beyond the veil, and I personally > can't imagine a worse ending. I agree. Harry frolicking with his parents and Serious in the afterlife would be insipid. Even in Harry's magical world nobody knows what if anything happens after we die, even the ghosts don't know. > Or a worse message to send children I don't care about messages, if you want to write a message send a E mail. JKR has one duty and one duty only, write the most interesting story possible; and if that involves Harry's death or anybody else we readers love then so be it. Eggplant From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon May 29 08:26:57 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 08:26:57 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153061 > Alla: > > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I > mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , > would she mention it to her friend? > > I mean, why share the fact that you are being bribed with your > friend? > > So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's > pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to > me. a_svirn: But shouldn't we go with the "innocent until proven guilty" premise rather than "guilty until proven innocent"? Only in a really rotten society, oppressed and run by fear one remark from the likes of Draco Malfoy would suffice to ruin a venerable doyen's reputation. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon May 29 08:50:49 2006 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 08:50:49 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153062 > houyhnhnm: > > I have been intrigued by Rowling's statement that the four houses > represent the four elements. In astrology, each of the three signs > associated with a particular element has its negative and positive > expression, but no sign is superior to any other. > > Rowling has shown us good and bad Gryffindors, and bad Slytherins. > She has implied that there are good Slytherins and she has also > implied that no house is superior to any other. > > So what would a "bad" Hufflepuff trait be if not conformity? (I should > have used the word "conformity" rather than "mediocrity". It is > closer to what I was trying to say.) > > What is a "bad" Ravenclaw like? We know the virtues of the other two > houses. What are their vices? > > I am open to suggestions. a_svirn: Yes, I understand that. It's just that I wouldn't say that conformity is the other side of fairmindedness, in the same way as, say, impetuosity and recklessness can be the other side of bravery. I really wouldn't know *what* can be the other side of fairmindedness. Maybe, certain detachment? Lack of involvement? Indifference? If you are always unfailingly fair, you risk earning reputation of a "cold fish". There are times when taking sides are more important than being fair. It is certainly the case with Harry. For instance, he knows that Grubby-Plank is a better teacher, but he would never admit it because of Hagrid. On the other hand, the Hufflepuffs are loyal as well as fair, so I really am at loss where to look for their bad traits. Well, I suppose conformity *can* be the other side of loyalty, but only if the relationship in question is unequal. As for Ravenclaw, I'd say eccentricity is the vice of the intellectual. Usually eccentricity is a price for living chiefly in one's own head. So Luna is a "bad Ravenclaw" in a way, even though we all quite like her. Eccentricity is a vice that is easy to absolve. From scarah at gmail.com Mon May 29 11:31:57 2006 From: scarah at gmail.com (Scarah) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 04:31:57 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3202590605290431m66c756b7l14da414e65982ea7@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153063 > a_svirn: > I really wouldn't know *what* can be the other side of > fairmindedness. Could it perhaps be "judgement?" Fairness necessitates a certain judgement of whom to be fairest to, and when. The Hufflepuffs are ready to judge Harry in CoS when they think he is the Heir of Slytherin and has threatened and then cursed Justin. The Sorting Hat described them as "just" which is reminiscent of justice, and judges. Maybe the Sorting Hat finally put Neville in Gryffindor when it realized this was one suit he wasn't strong in. Sarah From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Mon May 29 12:42:59 2006 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 05:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory Message-ID: <20060529124259.23336.qmail@web36804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153064 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 17, A Sluggish Memory (With profound gratitude to Penapart Elf, for all her invaluable suggestions and edits) The chapter opens shortly after the New Year, and Ginny, Harry and Ron are getting ready to return to Hogwarts by floo, through a one-off arrangement by the Ministry of Magic. Molly is giving them a tearful sendoff, which is her general state these days. They arrive in McGonnagall?s office and head for the Gryffindor Tower. When they reach the Fat Lady, she is clearly hung over and the password has changed. Hermione rushes up, having arrived shortly beforehand, and she provides the new password, ?Abstinence.? She has another message from Dumbledore for Harry, arranging to meet the following evening. As soon as they enter the common room, Ron is tackled ? er ? approached by Lavender, cooing ?Won-Won,? and they soon adopt their standard positions, entwined about each other. Hermione and Harry head for a quiet part of the room, and she invites Ginny to join them. Ginny declines, saying she?s promised to meet Dean, but Harry notices she says it without much enthusiasm. Harry attempts to talk to Hermione about her attitude towards Ron, but she is not yet ready to overlook his behavior. He then describes the conversation he overheard between Snape and Draco. Predictably, her reaction resembles Lupin?s and Arthur Weasley?s, but she does concede that Draco is obviously up to something. At the same time, she suggests that Draco?s ?master? might be his father, not Lord Voldemort. She asks about Lupin, and Harry says he?s not happy, having had to hang out with werewolves. He mentions Fenrir Greyback, and Hermione instantly recognizes the name. She reminds Harry that Greyback is the ?family friend? Draco used to threaten Borgin in Knockturn Alley. Harry believes this proves Draco is a Death Eater, but Hermione is less willing to jump to that conclusion. Harry tells Hermione about his encounter with Scrimgeour over Christmas, and they spend the rest of the evening enjoyably, disparaging the Ministry of Magic. The next morning, the sixth-years find a sign-up for Apparition Lessons. It becomes the topic du jour, with Ron concerned he won?t pass the first time and the twins will tease him endlessly. Harry hopes that it is a better experience than Side-Along-Apparition. Seamus, lost in dreams of besting his cousin in Apparating, inadvertently flattens Professor Flitwick with a blast of water. While Seamus is set writing his lines, Ron lets the others know Harry has experienced Side-Along-Apparition. Throughout the day, Harry is besieged with questions about Apparition. Finally, it is time for him to meet with Dumbledore. He wonders once again how Dumbledore?s hand was injured, but he resists asking. Instead, Dumbledore tells him he heard about Harry?s meeting with Scrimgeour. Harry discovers that Fudge hatched the idea and Scrimgeour took it up, demanding that Dumbledore arrange a meeting. Harry realizes this is the argument reported in the Daily Prophet, and Dumbledore confirms it. Harry tells Dumbledore that Scrimgeour accused him of being ?Dumbledore?s man through and through.? Harry says, ?I told him I was.? Dumbledore is visibly moved, and Harry hears a musical cry from Fawkes. He looks away, embarrassed at Dumbledore?s emotional display. Harry adds that Scrimgeour also tried to find out where Dumbledore goes when he's not at school. The Headmaster is aware of the MoM's intense curiosity about his activities, having already been forced to jinx Dawlish who was tailing Dumbledore for the Ministry. Harry mentions the conversation between Snape and Draco to Dumbledore, who dismisses it, saying it is of no great importance. When Harry questions his response, Dumbledore shows rare impatience with Harry, telling him he understands all Harry said and likely more than Harry understood. He reiterates his trust in Snape. Despite Harry?s irritation with Dumbledore, he pays attention, realizing that he gains nothing by arguing. Dumbledore then continues Tom Riddle?s story, through Tom?s arrival at Hogwarts and his strikingly altered demeanor from the arrogant, willful child at the orphanage. Tom charmed and impressed most of the faculty; Dumbledore chose not to tell them about his prior behavior in the hopes that he had determined to follow a different path. Harry remembers his conversation with Tom Riddle in the Chamber of Secrets and realizes that Dumbledore was not among those who trusted Tom. Dumbledore admits that he kept a close eye on him. He mentions Tom?s group of ?friends? that appear to have been the forerunner of the Death Eaters, and in fact some of the members were early Death Eaters. Dumbledore had difficulty finding anyone willing to talk about Tom; those who would talk mentioned his obsession with his parentage, understandable in an orphan. His search led Tom to conclude that his father was not a wizard; at this point, Dumbledore believes, Tom dropped his given name in order to assume the identity of Lord Voldemort. Tom then pursued his line of inquiry based on his maternal grandfather?s name. This led him to the Gaunts, and he went to see them the summer of his sixteenth year. They move to the pensieve for the next memory, which is Morfin?s encounter with Tom Riddle. In it, Morfin mistook Tom for his father and revealed that Riddle Sr. returned to live with his parents after leaving Morfin's sister. As Morfin bewailed the missing Slytherin locket and being dishonored, the memory ends abruptly, and Dumbledore explains that Morfin?s memory ended there. He remembered nothing until the next morning, when he was lying on his floor and the Gaunt ring which he had worn was missing. That same morning, the dead Riddles (Tom Sr. and his mother and father) were discovered and the Muggle authorities were mystified. The Ministry of Magic immediately recognized it as a wizard murder, and they knew of a muggle-hater nearby. Sure enough, when they visited Morfin, not only was his wand proven to have been used to commit the murders, he made a boastful confession, supplying details only the killer would have known. Only through Dumbledore?s thoroughness and skill as a Legilimens was he able to retrieve the true memory. He attempted to exonerate Morfin who died before the Ministry reached a decision. Harry asks why the Ministry didn?t realize someone else was involved, since Tom at the time was underage and the Ministry can detect underage magic. Dumbledore explains that they can detect the magic but not the perpetrator, hence Harry?s trouble when Dobby performed magic at number four, Privet Drive. He goes on to say that the Ministry relies on parents to monitor their children?s use of magic, which Harry points out is faulty, at best. Dumbledore presses on, having one more memory to explore that evening. He produces another phial, and Harry notices that the contents seem somewhat congealed when Dumbledore pours them into the pensieve. Landing in the memory, Harry instantly recognizes a much younger Slughorn, apparently holding court in his office. Harry sees Tom Riddle among the students gathered, and he notices Tom was wearing the Gaunt ring. Tom asked about a rumored retirement, and Slughorn noted that Tom knows more about what's going on at Hogwarts than half the staff. During this interchange, the room suddenly fills with fog, and Slughorn?s altered voice announces that Tom will go wrong. Just as suddenly, the scene returns to the office, and the party was breaking up. Tom lagged behind to ask Slughorn about Horcruxes. Again, the fog descends and Harry hears Slughorn speak through the fog, denying any knowledge of Horcruxes and ordering Tom out of the room. Returning from the memory, Harry is puzzled. Dumbledore had said this was the most important memory, yet he feels they learned very little. Dumbledore explains that Slughorn, being ashamed, tampered with the memory, which accounts for the fog. However, his true memory remains, and Dumbledore sets Harry the task of retrieving it from Slughorn. Harry questions that he is the best person for the job. Why doesn?t Dumbledore just use his considerable skills? Dumbledore is not willing to wrest the information from Slughorn who would now be on guard against Dumbledore, and he believes Harry can find a way to collect Slughorn?s memory without force. As Harry leaves, he hears Phineas?s portrait express Harry?s own doubts, saying ?I can?t see why the boy should be able to do it better than you, Dumbledore.? As Dumbledore replies that he wouldn?t expect Phineas to, we hear Fawkes once again. Questions: 1. Early in the chapter, Harry and Hermione have the following exchange: [Harry:] ?So how was your Christmas?? ?Oh fine,? [Hermione] shrugged ?Nothing special. How was it at Won-Won?s?? ?I?ll tell you in a minute,? said Harry. ?Look, Hermione, can?t you - ?? ?No, I can?t,? she said flatly. ?So don?t even ask.? ?I thought maybe, you know, over Christmas?? ?It was the Fat Lady who drank a vat of five-hundred-year-old wine, Harry, not me.? (pp. 329-330, Bloomsbury edition) I first presumed this was fairly straightforward. Harry wants Hermione to stop being petty over Ron and she replies not as long as she remembers the past (unlike someone who had been on a bender). Upon rereading it, however, it sounds much more ambiguous. Is Hermione suggesting she has nothing to feel guilty about? That she is temperate, unlike Ron and the Fat Lady? For that matter, is that really what Harry was going to ask her? Thoughts? 2. When the other sixth-years learn Harry has experienced Apparition, they pelt him with questions. Given how many of them come from wizarding families, why do they grill Harry? Why not ask Mom, Dad, or cousin Fergus? 3. Once again, Professor Flitwick provides comedy relief. Is this his role in the series, or will he play a more profound role by the end? 4. In the scene when Harry confides his concerns about the Snape/Draco conversation, we have a Harry who is feeling wronged but takes the high road, refraining from arguing. This is markedly different from his confrontations with Umbridge in Order of the Phoenix. Can we attribute that to his respect for Dumbledore, his added maturity, or both? 5. With Tom Riddle, Dumbledore again demonstrates his belief in second chances. This could build the case for ?See, he was right to give second chances,? or ?Here?s an early demonstration of his tragic flaw.? Which do you believe will be the eventual outcome? 6. Dumbledore describes the group of Tom?s friends as ?a mixture of the weak seeking protection, the ambitious seeking some shared glory, and the thuggish, gravitating towards a leader who could show them more refined forms of cruelty.? Can we apply this description to any other groups in the series, both within and outside of Hogwarts? 7. We now have some explanation of how detection of underage magic works and the Ministry?s decision to allow families to monitor their own children. Did you find this to match your earlier presumptions? Do you agree with Harry that this policy is ?rubbish?? 8. Just how *did* Slughorn tamper with his memory? 9. Does the Slughorn memory scene help build the case for the Good Slytherin? 10. Harry (and Phineas) thinks Dumbledore could get the accurate memory without Harry?s help. Does Dumbledore have a larger purpose in setting Harry with the task? 11. Fawkes ?speaks? twice in this scene, once after Harry calls himself Dumbledore?s man and once after Dumbledore replies to Phineas. What is the significance of the placement of these two cries? NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see "HPfGU HBP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 29 13:03:00 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:03:00 -0000 Subject: Nice vs Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: <495.123ede3.31abd0b1@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153065 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, puduhepa98 at ... wrote: > > > > > Lanval: > > > Can you name one of those acts? > > > >Lanval > >Next -- at the end of HBP, which you mentioned in another post. Snape > >yells at the DEs to leave Potter for LV, right? > > . > >Until we know beyond any doubt what Snape's role was in that book, > >and whether he's only acting the DE here, I will not pass judgment. > >Besides, strictly speaking, Snape does not save Harry 's life -- the > >DE is 'only' using the Cruciatus Curse. > > > > > Leslie41: > > If one defines "compassion" as the awareness of suffering and the > > wish to stop it, or to prevent it, I can name many. Starting with > > his work as a spy, and his attempts to save Harry's life. > > > >.Pippin > >Snape seems almost incapable of compassion, which makes him > such a pain to be around, while Lupin is an extremely compassionate > man. > Nikkalmati: > I can think of several acts of compassion on Snape's part beginning with > Spinners End where he certainly had compassion on Narcissa when she went all weepy on him. > He also had compassion on Draco, when Harry performed the Sacrumsempra curse on him and Snape healed him. Both of these acts of compassion were directed toward a Malfoy for reasons that we probably will understand better in the future. > He may display compassion for Ginny, when she is taken by the Basilisk, if > the clutching of the back of the chair means he is concerned for her. Pippin: We have different definitions. My dictionary says compassion is a *deep* awareness of others' suffering, coupled with the desire to relieve it. It does not take a deep awareness of suffering to notice when someone is dissolving in tears, under the cruciatus curse, kidnapped by a bloodthirsty monster,bleeding to death from multiple wounds or lying in a dementor- induced coma. Snape doesn't seem to be aware of suffering when it presents itself more subtly, Whether that's because he doesn't care, or because he doesn't easily pick up cues from other people, is hard to say at this point. People who dish out ridicule but don't seem to be able to take it often have trouble reading cues: they're unaware of how much they're affecting others and at the same time they tend to take every insult as mortal because they can't tell when they're being teased. Pippin From estesrandy at yahoo.com Mon May 29 13:14:36 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:14:36 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > > houyhnhnm: > > > > I have been intrigued by Rowling's statement that the four houses > > represent the four elements. In astrology, each of the three signs > > associated with a particular element has its negative and positive > > expression, but no sign is superior to any other. > > BIG SNIP > As for Ravenclaw, I'd say eccentricity is the vice of the > intellectual. Usually eccentricity is a price for living chiefly in > one's own head. So Luna is a "bad Ravenclaw" in a way, even though > we all quite like her. Eccentricity is a vice that is easy to > absolve. > But wasn't it Goldwater who said "Eccentricity in the defense of Liberty is not a Vice !" ;0) Besides, Eccentricity would probably describe everyone on this list. Randy From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon May 29 13:48:48 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:48:48 -0000 Subject: A Better Life Under Voldemort was Re: re:Sectumsempra / ChapterDisc / In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153067 Catlady: > << 12. Why would werewolves have a better life under Voldemort? >> > > For the ones like Fenrir, they would (as others have already said) > have more victims ... hunting Muggles would be *encouraged*, and > wizard folk who had displeased LV might be *given* to them. > > For the ones who would like to sleep under a roof in a heated room and > take a hot bath and eat sweets and learn to use a wand, they know > they're not getting it under the current regime, so change the regime > ... LV loves to lie, and at least when he was TMR, he did so very > convincingly, so he probably promised to give that to them. Pippin: If Voldemort has Bella believing that a red-eyed snake-man is a pureblood wizard just like her, I'm sure he's got the werewolves thinking that he's a mutant dark creature just like them. The werewolves think they'll have a better life because Voldemort is naturally sympathetic to their interests. They're deluded, but no more so than any of Voldie's other faithful, all of whom think their cause is dear to his heart. Voldemort is quite capable of juggling opposing interests and keeping them all thinking that the side he's really on is theirs. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 14:39:49 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 14:39:49 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153068 > Alla: > > > > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I > > mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , > > would she mention it to her friend? > > > > I mean, why share the fact that you are being bribed with your > > friend? > > > > So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's > > pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to > > me. > > a_svirn: > But shouldn't we go with the "innocent until proven guilty" premise > rather than "guilty until proven innocent"? Only in a really rotten > society, oppressed and run by fear one remark from the likes of Draco > Malfoy would suffice to ruin a venerable doyen's reputation. > Alla: Well, yes, of course. "Innocent till proven guilty", but should we also automatically discard Draco's testimony just because we want him to be good in something and he may not be so? (Replying in general, not just to your argument) I mean, don't get me wrong - Marchbank may not be in Malfoy's pocket, she likely is not as in 'taking bribes", but why wouldn't she come for dinner as one Ministry employee to another? Carol's point about her residing her position at Wisengamot to protest Umbridge appointment speaks very well of her integrity, of course. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/153058 I don't think her being friends with Dumbledore is relevant though, since as we know Dumbledore thought that Fake!Moody was his friend too I don't think Neri's original point even was that she is necessarily taking bribes, but more like that Malfoys KNOW people in high places and his daddy will at least attempt to ASK those people a favor, whether Marchbank will do so or not is a different story of course. Malfoy is in on a lot of information that Harry is not. As I quote upthread he knows about Triwizard tournament earlier than Harry and co do, he also knows lots about Sirius Black, even that Black supposedly betrayed Harry's parents, while Harry still has no clue. Lucius KNOWS people, I see no reason to not think that Marchbank is one of them. And to go back to Draco's potion making skills - there is one reference which Carol brought up earlier that he cut the plants well, but there is NO reference of Snape ever praising his potion, not ONCE ( as far as I remember of course), but there is plenty of evidence that Draco is sucking up to all teachers AND there is an evidence that Snape has a very long special connection to Malfoys family. Does it tell me that Snape favors Malfoy for any "legitimate" reason? He could of course, but I don't see it. I think he favors Malfoy to stay in Lucius good graces and maybe he even genuinely cares for the boy, but I don't see that he favors him because Malfoy is a good student, and especially an outstanding student. Not that there shoud be a legitimate reason to favor a student, but yes I find Mcgonagall favoring Hermione to be easier to swallow, because at least Mcgonagall favors the best student in her subject as far as we know, not the daughter of her friends ( as far as we know). JMO, Alla. From Sherry at PebTech.net Mon May 29 14:50:21 2006 From: Sherry at PebTech.net (Sherry) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 14:50:21 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153069 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" wrote: > > houyhnhnm: > > I have been intrigued by Rowling's statement that the four houses > represent the four elements. In astrology, each of the three signs > associated with a particular element has its negative and positive > expression, but no sign is superior to any other. Amontillada: I think I've read her remark about the four elements again, but I'd forgotten it. Thanks for reminding/informing me of it, in any case! The astrological or the historical evidence of the four-element theory might be helpful in identifying the positive and negative qualities of the houses. > > So what would a "bad" Hufflepuff trait be if not conformity? (I should > have used the word "conformity" rather than "mediocrity". It is > closer to what I was trying to say.) > a_svirn: It's just that I wouldn't say that conformity is the other side of fairmindedness, in the same way as, say, impetuosity and recklessness can be the other side of bravery. Amontillada: Actually, conformity as the other side of fairmindedness seems just right to me. As I interpret the two terms, _fairness_ implies standing up for what's right and just even when one has to oppose the common or usual standard. On the other hand, _conformity_ means being afraid to oppose the usual and make oneself stand up for that which is fair and just. I interpret the two very much as opposing characteristics. > What is a "bad" Ravenclaw like? We know the virtues of the other two > houses. What are their vices? > > I am open to suggestions. Amontillada: I can't think of a single word for it, but what about extreme detatchment...for example, immersing oneself in theory or studies, such as Wizarding history to the point of ignoring reality, such as Voldemort? This habit is sometimes seen in intellectuals--hence the common (in our world) stereotype of a study-absorbed scholar. Amontillada From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 29 15:15:23 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 11:15:23 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers References: Message-ID: <009101c68332$b5e62480$2b9e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 153070 Alla: > > Well, yes, of course. "Innocent till proven guilty", but should we > also automatically discard Draco's testimony just because we want > him to be good in something and he may not be so? (Replying in > general, not just to your argument) Magpie: Clever way to turn the argument around, but the evidence still all weighs on the side of Griselda Marchbanks being a tough old bird who could eat Lucius Malfoy for lunch. We've got one line from a character with a history of exaggerating the importance of being a Pureblood with connections against no hint of a revelation of any sort of foul play, no refrence to any possibility that the OWLS aren't fair ever again, a Marchbanks who intimidates other people rather than being intimidated by them, a line from Neville Longbottom innocently poking a hole and deflating Draco's pretension and four years of Draco being cocky and favored in Potions. I don't think that's discarding Draco's line because one wants him to be good at something. That's just reading the cues in the scene in the most straightforward way. Draco looks bad either way you read the scene. Alla: > > I mean, don't get me wrong - Marchbank may not be in Malfoy's > pocket, she likely is not as in 'taking bribes", but why wouldn't > she come for dinner as one Ministry employee to another? Magpie: She might be having dinner with Stan Shunpike too for all we know, but when Draco says they have dinner and Neville says she never mentions the Malfoys it's showing us that the Malfoys don't impress Marchbanks, even if she's had dinner at their house. Nice little subtle show that Neville's social connections are very good. Alla: > I don't think her being friends with Dumbledore is relevant though, > since as we know Dumbledore thought that Fake!Moody was his friend > too Magpie: So the woman is polyjuiced now? The story is ready to collapse from all the complications piled onto it! Alla: > > I don't think Neri's original point even was that she is necessarily > taking bribes, but more like that Malfoys KNOW people in high places > and his daddy will at least attempt to ASK those people a favor, > whether Marchbank will do so or not is a different story of course. Magpie: Her point was to use a scene of Draco bragging and Neville innocently revealing how much he's exaggerating as a reason to discard any ggood rade Neville got on an OWL. Alla:. > > Malfoy is in on a lot of information that Harry is not. As I quote > upthread he knows about Triwizard tournament earlier than Harry and > co do, he also knows lots about Sirius Black, even that Black > supposedly betrayed Harry's parents, while Harry still has no clue. Magpie: The Weasleys are in on the Triwizard Tournament too, but they're not telling Harry and Ron--we get lots of elbow nudging scenes. Draco's father obviously told him, but that's not super secret knowledge since Ron's whole family knows it. They were just keeping it as a surprise. Many people in the WW knows that Sirius Black supposedly betrayed Harry's parents (and Harry quickly becomes the one with the real inside knowledge on that score). None of this has anything to do with suggesting that a character who's characterized as a tough old Dumbledore supporter is, based on one line of Malfoy's that's undermined by Neville, actually taking bribes and we should think of her a book later when Malfoy shows up in Potions ready for class. When Malfoy knows something that Harry doesn't, it's eventually revealed. Not to mention it's usually presented as something that Malfoy actually knows that Harry doesn't, which this line isn't. Alla: > And to go back to Draco's potion making skills - there is one > reference which Carol brought up earlier that he cut the plants > well, but there is NO reference of Snape ever praising his potion, > not ONCE ( as far as I remember of course), but there is plenty of > evidence that Draco is sucking up to all teachers AND there is an > evidence that Snape has a very long special connection to Malfoys > family. Magpie: Yes, Snape's relationship with Draco goes beyond his performance in Potions, that's clear. But that doesn't mean he can't get an O on his test. Alla: > > Does it tell me that Snape favors Malfoy for any "legitimate" > reason? He could of course, but I don't see it. I think he favors > Malfoy to stay in Lucius good graces and maybe he even genuinely > cares for the boy, but I don't see that he favors him because Malfoy > is a good student, and especially an outstanding student. Magpie: No one is arguing that Snape favors Malfoy *because* he's a good student. We know Snape's favor of Malfoy is personal. We're saying that he still also does well in his class, which isn't that remarkable. If he didn't, imo, Snape's favor would come across very differently. -m From penhaligon at gmail.com Mon May 29 15:36:26 2006 From: penhaligon at gmail.com (Panhandle) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 08:36:26 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers References: Message-ID: <002f01c68335$a6fd6ed0$0200a8c0@the248437c0a60> No: HPFGUIDX 153071 Alla states: > I mean, don't get me wrong - Marchbank may not be in Malfoy's > pocket, she likely is not as in 'taking bribes", but why wouldn't > she come for dinner as one Ministry employee to another? Since when is Malfoy an employee of the Ministry? Suzanne From Sherry at PebTech.net Mon May 29 15:37:35 2006 From: Sherry at PebTech.net (Sherry) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 15:37:35 -0000 Subject: Draco and Neville on Marchbanks (WAS: Draco's potion making skills) In-Reply-To: <010601c682d4$64836c50$0c6c400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153072 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" wrote: > > > > Magpie: > > ...You think Marchbanks was in the > > Malfoy's > pocket? > > > > Alla: > > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I mean, > think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , would she > mention it to her friend? >.... > Amontillada: I don't think she would, especially if her friend was both principled and opinionated like Mrs. Longbottom. I don't read Draco's bragging as a specific indication that his father had bribed Marchbanks to give him an O, but as a deliberately general boast that he had an "inside advantage"--details left to the imaginations of those whose ears were his targets. Nor do I think that Neville was specifically responding to any implied bribe. He was simply pointing out that Marchbanks wasn't the close friend of the Malfoys that Draco wanted to imply. I'm quite ready to accept that she had dined at Lucius Malfoy's home, as his son said. But she apparently wasn't quite so much the regular visitor or close family friend that Draco tried to imply. If she and Malfoy were good friends, she might well have mentioned that in passing to her other close friend, Mrs. Longbottom. ("At the Malfoys' last week..."). THAT--the idea that Marchbanks was a regular guest and good friend of the Malfoys--was the implication that Neville rebutted. Amontillada From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 15:53:48 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 15:53:48 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153074 > Alla: > > > > I mean, don't get me wrong - Marchbank may not be in Malfoy's > > pocket, she likely is not as in 'taking bribes", but why wouldn't > > she come for dinner as one Ministry employee to another? > > Magpie: > She might be having dinner with Stan Shunpike too for all we know, but when > Draco says they have dinner and Neville says she never mentions the Malfoys > it's showing us that the Malfoys don't impress Marchbanks, even if she's had > dinner at their house. Nice little subtle show that Neville's social > connections are very good. Alla: That's true, it does show that Neville's connections are good, that I agree with. > Alla: > > I don't think her being friends with Dumbledore is relevant though, > > since as we know Dumbledore thought that Fake!Moody was his friend > > too > > Magpie: > So the woman is polyjuiced now? The story is ready to collapse from all the > complications piled onto it! Alla: Hehe. No, I meant that DD is not always good in choosing his friends or recognising them :) > Alla: > > > > I don't think Neri's original point even was that she is necessarily > > taking bribes, but more like that Malfoys KNOW people in high places > > and his daddy will at least attempt to ASK those people a favor, > > whether Marchbank will do so or not is a different story of course. > > Magpie: > Her point was to use a scene of Draco bragging and Neville innocently > revealing how much he's exaggerating as a reason to discard any ggood rade > Neville got on an OWL. Alla: Neri is a "he", as far as I know :). That's the thing though - to me Neville does not show that Draco exaggerates here, although it certainly can be read that way, I understand, I just don't see the reason to discard the other possibility. > Magpie: > Yes, Snape's relationship with Draco goes beyond his performance in Potions, > that's clear. But that doesn't mean he can't get an O on his test. Alla: Yes, he could get an O on his test. My point is that I don't see signs in canon that he did. If JKR considers this to be not an important detail that can go in without any foreshadowing, than sure, he could get any grade for all I know. If JKR thought that this needed foreshadowing, then I just don't see any, that is all I am saying. > Magpie: > No one is arguing that Snape favors Malfoy *because* he's a good student. > We know Snape's favor of Malfoy is personal. We're saying that he still > also does well in his class, which isn't that remarkable. If he didn't, imo, > Snape's favor would come across very differently. Alla: Okay, first of all then I misundertood you completely. Didn't you said somewhere upthread that Snape favors Draco BECAUSE he gets good grades, because he is a good student? I apologise if this was not your point. And as I said above I don't see the signs of Draco doing well in class, it is not necessarily contradicted by canon ( although I agree with Neri - if one is good at something, usually one does not feel a need to suck up in the first place IMO), but it is not shown there either. And how differently Snape favor would come across if Darco was not a good student in your opinion? I am not sure I understand. > Alla states: > > I mean, don't get me wrong - Marchbank may not be in Malfoy's > > pocket, she likely is not as in 'taking bribes", but why wouldn't > > she come for dinner as one Ministry employee to another? Susanne: > Since when is Malfoy an employee of the Ministry? Alla: Ooops. Sorry. :) How about as one Ministry employee to "unofficial" Ministry employee, who donates a lot of money and made Fudge basically do whatever he wants? JMO, Alla From carolinayerbe at yahoo.com Mon May 29 15:52:30 2006 From: carolinayerbe at yahoo.com (carolinayerbe) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 15:52:30 -0000 Subject: The Veil and The Mirror Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153075 Hi! I'm new to the group, so I'm not sure if this has been covered. I'd like to know what you all think the nature of The Veil is... what do Lupin and Luna know about it? Why doesn't Harry ask more questions about it? Also, what's the nature of the small mirror Sirius gave Harry? Is it going to play an important role in book 7? It must be there for a reason, what it is? Cheers, Pepa. From tareprachi at yahoo.com Mon May 29 12:07:14 2006 From: tareprachi at yahoo.com (pforparvati) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 12:07:14 -0000 Subject: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153076 Most of us think that the locket in Grimmauld Place must be the real horcrux. But we know that Harry has seen that locket in Grimmauld Place. [GoF] Harry has also seen the original locket around Merope's neck in DD's pensieve. If the two lockets would have been same, then surely Harry would have recognized it. But he has not. I mean as soon as he saw that locket in the Pensieve he would have wondered "I have seen this somewhere..."... if not immediately then at least after the cave incident...may be after some thinking... But this is not the case. I understand it's all our guesswork here. But still why are we supporting this theory, when Harry himself is not able to relate those two lockets. PP, who knows this question is not even worth of penny, but still hoping that somebody might answer... From melclaros at yahoo.com Mon May 29 16:40:35 2006 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 16:40:35 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153077 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla: > > Let's talk some more about Draco's cutting skills. I am really not > sure that Snape is being truthful here or that Draco is always a > perfect cutter ( meaning an "O" level cutter). > > Remember Draco showing up after his injury in Potions class and > making Ron cutting his ingredients for him? I mean, Snape made him > on Draco's request, but that is not very relevant for my purposes. > > Now, if Malfoy was truly unable to cut here, that would be a > different story, but we KNOW Draco is faking and he does not hide it > from Harry or the reader. > > So, that tells me ( IMO of course) that Draco is not really > comfortable in his Potion making or cutting skills if he is so glad > to make Ron do it. > You're kidding, right? All that scene says is that Draco is *very* comfortable embarrassing any member of "the trio" and in having people he considers inferior to his dirty-work for him. You really don't see at all that Draco is simply enjoying making Ron do double-work? From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon May 29 16:55:45 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 16:55:45 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory In-Reply-To: <20060529124259.23336.qmail@web36804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153078 > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 17, A Sluggish Memory Answers to the Questions which I have snipped.. > 1. I think that Hermione is just saying that she hasn't forgotten. So that conversation is what it seems to be. 2. They ask Harry about Apparator because he is their age and can tell them what it was like from his POV. 3. RE: Flitwick. Don't know, don't care. 4. This is mostly because of his increasing maturity and also because of his respect for DD. 5. DD has compassion on the errors or others and is a man that doesn't feel the need to put others down by telling what he knows of their short comings to those around him. That is admirable. On the other hand, DD is no fool. He keeps a close eye on Tom. DD knows Tom's past and does give Tom a second chance, which if anyone of us were in Tom's place, we would appreciate. I do not see this as a "flaw". I see this as the only course for a man of compassion and forgiveness. I would be willing to bet that there may have been others who were on the receiving end of this compassion and did turn their lives around because of it. Just because 100% of those who received DD's compassion and mercy did not appreciate it or change because of it, doesn't mean that it is wrong for DD to do. It is a very good, true and right thing for a man of DD's caliber and position to do. I would expect no less from him. 6. The DE are that way, of course. I guess one might be able to present a case for the DA in that way. As to the OP, I don't think that most of the members fit that description. We have Mundungus, who is there for his own reasons. But I think that the others are there for the right reason, which is to be an underground force against the powers of darkness and evil. I know some are going to say that Lupin is there just for protection, but I think he too is there for the right reason, as is our friend Snape. 7. I think this helps clear up the confusion about detection of underage magic. I think it makes sense. Harry is a bit angry to hear this because he could never get away with stuff that kids from a Wizarding family could. But it makes sense for it to be done that way. I think that most Magical parents would monitor their children, not so much the doing of magic but the danger that it might cause. Much like Muggle parents punishing a child for playing with matches. 8. I assume that there is a spell or some sort that can modify a memory. 9. Slughorn is a true Slytherin that is for sure. But we also see that he does not agree with LV's agenda and with his actions. Not everyone who is a Slytherin is a evil bigot, so yes, one could make the case for Slughorn being the `good Slytherin'. 10. This reminds me of the discussions of manipulation. DD expects Harry to use his powers of "cunning" to get what he wants from Slughorn. And our author does not seem to think it wrong for Harry to get Slughorn drunk to get the memory! All is fair in war, I guess. It is interesting that a Slytherin type skill is used against a Slytherin. I also think that DD sends Harry for this job because he knows that Slughorn feels guilty about what he told LV. And this gives Slughorn a way to redeem and hopefully forgive himself. Harry tells him as much. Of course Harry says that he doesn't think that Slughorn will remember the whole thing later. But I wonder about that. On some level I think that he will. He has to remember in order to forgive himself and to be in a position to help Harry in the future, if necessary. It is Slughorn's love for Lily that makes him help Harry, and I also think that Harry gave him a way to be forgiven. One could say that Slughorn did nothing wrong by telling Tom, it was what Tom did with that information that was wrong. And I would agree with that, except that Slughorn blames himself and he needs to let that go. DD probably suspects this and gave Harry the task because he knows that only Harry can tell Slughorn that he is forgiven for any part that he thinks he may have had in the creation of LV and the death of James and Lily. 11. Fawkes is showing his approval and agreement for DD's thinking on the matter. Tonks_op From carodave92 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 17:06:01 2006 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 17:06:01 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 17, A Sluggish Memory > > Answers to the Questions which I have snipped.. > more snipping> > 1. I think that Hermione is just saying that she hasn't forgotten. > > > 9. Slughorn is a true Slytherin that is for sure. But we also see > that he does not agree with LV's agenda and with his actions. Not > everyone who is a Slytherin is a evil bigot, so yes, one could make > the case for Slughorn being the `good Slytherin'. Now Carodave: I completely agree. Slytherins are crafty and out for themselves. However, this doesn't mean that they want to see others hurt...and Slughorn shows the capacity for love (as does Pansy...) and friendship and loyalty. It's just that he wants to be rewarded for those feelings...that makes him different from a Gryffindor who feels the same things. However, he's not trying to hurt anyone and certainly doesn't approve of murder, or those who commit evil acts, so I agree that he is a 'good' Slytherin. Carodave > Tonks_op: > 11. Fawkes is showing his approval and agreement for DD's thinking > on the matter. Now Carodave: Tonks, I agreed with all your replies to the chapter questions, but on this last point, I believe that Fawkes embodies the emotions of Hogwarts. His two cries in this exchange indicate DD is feeling something deeply, just as his lament following DD's death indicates the deep sorrow of the school. Carodave, who realizes that this sounded less crazy in her head... > > > From carodave92 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 17:11:53 2006 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 17:11:53 -0000 Subject: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153081 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pforparvati" wrote: > > Most of us think that the locket in Grimmauld Place must be the real > horcrux. But we know that Harry has seen that locket in Grimmauld Place. > [GoF] Harry has also seen the original locket around Merope's neck in > DD's pensieve. If the two lockets would have been same, then surely > Harry would have recognized it. PP, who knows this question is not even worth of penny, but still > hoping that somebody might answer... Carodave replies: Harry's mind doesn't seem to work this way. Hermione has to remind him that he's already heard of Fenrir Greyback (from Malfoy in Borgin & Burke) when he tells her about the werewolf. The day in 12GP that Harry saw the locket, he also saw a number of other objects, some of which actually tried to 'attack', for example, the music box that put them all to sleep until Ginny slammed the lid shut. These objects would probably stand out more in Harry's memory than one which did nothing. Also, it was a year (more or less) since he saw the locket. And Harry has not yet connected RAB to Regulus Black. Once he makes that connection, he is sure to return to 12 GP. Didn't Kreacher take the locket back to his nest when he 'saved' some of the items? I think that Kreacher will be instrumental in finding and destroying this particular horcrux, whether or not he wants to... Carodave, who is posting this a second time b/c the first one may have been blocked by Yahoomort > From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon May 29 17:13:16 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 17:13:16 -0000 Subject: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pforparvati" wrote: > But still why are we supporting this theory, when Harry himself is not able to relate those two lockets. > Tonks: Harry doesn't relate the two lockets for the same reason he doesn't know that Aberforth is the bartender at the Hogshead and the fact that he didn't realize that if he couldn't see Draco on the map and Draco wasn't in Hogsmead that Draco must `obviously' be in the ROR. Because sometimes Harry doesn't think and he has not learned to be very observent. He also isn't able to use his full abilities when he is under emotional stress. If he wants to be an Auror he has a bit more learning to do. Tonks_op From celizwh at intergate.com Mon May 29 17:14:56 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 17:14:56 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: <3202590605290431m66c756b7l14da414e65982ea7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153083 a_svirn: > I really wouldn't know *what* can be the other > side of fairmindedness. houyhnhnm: Now I am thinking of the old saw about not being "so open-minded that your brains fall out". So maybe lack of discrimination is a fault of Hufflepuff. And maybe that ties in with what Sarah is saying. Sarah: > Could it perhaps be "judgement?" Fairness necessitates > certain judgement of whom to be fairest to, and when. The > Hufflepuffs are ready to judge Harry in CoS when they think > he is the Heir of Slytherin and has threatened and then > cursed Justin. The Sorting Hat described them as "just" > which is reminiscent of justice, and judges. houyhnhnm: Judgementalism. Yes. The bad expression of a characteristic can be an exaggeration of the trait as in courageous/reckless or fairminded/indiscriminant, but it can also be the opposite as in just/judgemental. Or maybe being judgemental is really an exaggeration, too, of being just, one that goes so far, it ends up as an opposite. Your example of the Hufflepuff's reaction to Harry in CoS is a good one of Hufflepuff judgementalism. Maybe Zacharius Smith is an example of being "so open-minded that your brains fall out", at the Hog's Head meeting, when he insists on hearing both sides in the You-Know-Who-is-back-or-he-isn't debate even though the time has clearly come for action. He is also judgemental when he is announcer at the Quidditch match. When lack of discrimination combines with judgementalism you get the worst kind of Hufflepuff; you get Zacharias Smith. a_svirn: > Maybe, certain detachment? Lack of involvement? > Indifference? If you are always unfailingly fair, > you risk earning reputation of a "cold fish". > As for Ravenclaw, I'd say eccentricity is the vice > of the intellectual. Usually eccentricity is a price > for living chiefly in one's own head. So Luna is a > "bad Ravenclaw" in a way, even though we all quite > like her. Eccentricity is a vice that is easy to absolve. houyhnhnm: Luna's character is a good argument for eccenticity being the vice of Ravenclaw and so is Flitwick's. Detachment and lack of involvement, I would think, would be Ravenclaw's faults, too, more so that Hufflepuff's--the recluse in the Ivory Tower who is unconcerned with the rest of humanity. Cho Chang might be a good example. For all her weepiness in OotP, she strikes me as kind of a cold fish. The fate of her world is hanging in the balance, but she doesn't seem to think it concerns her. So, while Luna is a very good human being, she is a "bad" Ravenclaw, and so, really, are Flitwick and Cho Chang. What's missing is a "good" Ravenclaw. Maybe we will see one in book 7. I would also like to see a truly good Slytherin in book 7, not one who is merely not on Voldemort's side, but one who uses the qualities that Slytherin prized--ambition, will, resourcefulness, determination--for the betterment of the WW instead of just for personal gain at the cost of its destruction. From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Mon May 29 17:21:09 2006 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:21:09 -0400 Subject: Minerva McGonagall Speculation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2dc31dfffa0f448e2eac1ab770493e8d@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 153084 Recently, we had a few threads on ESE | Minerva. (Not that I can find them again--so many posts to wade through). This is an idea that I just don't see. Not that it's not interesting to speculate; however, I see Dumbledore trusting Minerva with his most the thing that may be most important to him--Hogwarts. So important is Hogwarts that he doesn't want her getting sidetracked with other things. I think she would find it difficult to not take over the Horcrux problem if she knew about it. I don't think it's lack of trust on Dumbledore's part that has him keeping MM separate from some of the activities, but rather DD method of keeping MM focused and securing the future of the school. I have another thought, possibly as wild a theory, concerning Minerva though. It however hinges on the theory that Dumbledore is not dead. If Dumbledore is, in some way still present, it will be Minerva who discovers it. Why? It's her initials "MM." it's the same initials as Mary Magdalene. And since McGonagall is at Hogwarts and has access to DD's office, if DD is around in anyway, I think she will be the one who makes this discovery. Barbara (Ivogun) From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 29 19:24:35 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 19:24:35 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153086 > > Alla: > > Yes, he could get an O on his test. My point is that I don't see > signs in canon that he did. If JKR considers this to be not an > important detail that can go in without any foreshadowing, than > sure, he could get any grade for all I know. > > If JKR thought that this needed foreshadowing, then I just don't see > any, that is all I am saying. Potioncat: Based on Snape's speech... and McGonagall's comment...Snape expected some number of students to obtain Outstanding on Potions OWLs. It would be reasonable to think he expected more than just Hermione to make an O. We don't see how Ravenclaws or Hufflpuffs do in his class. We don't know how many careers require NEWT level Potions. Having said all that, did canon give us any clues as to how "any" of the students were doing? I remember at the end of SS/PS we were told that Ron and Harry did all right. (about as vague as one can get, I know.) We've seen Neville, and Crabbe-or-Goyle mess up. We've been told some of Ron and Harry's potions didn't come out like Hermione's did. We haven't been told how the homework scored. Most of the rest of the class is hardly mentioned at all. The fact that Snape saying nothing to Hermione means he can find nothing to complain at, may mean the same for the other students he says nothing to. We see Snape looking at students' potions and we "hear" Harry's description of the potions, but it isn't clear how they're doing. It appears that Snape's classwork is more demanding than the OWl exams. I think Draco managed an O on his own. As to Marchbanks: I've copied the quote,with a little snipping, from Magpie, I think. ******************************************************************* > OotP, Ch. 31: Now, Father's been friendly with the head of the Wizarding > Examinations Authority for years - old Griselda Marchbanks - we've had her > round for dinner and everything... ***************************************************************** Lucius Malfoy, in the grand tradition of succesful individuals knows how to network, knows how to smooze. He follows in the more cheerful but no more sincere actions of Slughorn. Draco is picking it up too, although he's not as good as his father appears to be. Draco, who seems to be doing just fine in Potions, is now name- dropping. I wouldn't be surprised if Marchbanks hasn't been to the Malfoy home for dinner, along with a grand number of other MoM ranking executives. Perhaps at some event in honor of St. Mungo's, or some other above board charity work the Malfoys are involved in. I'm sure Narcissa and Lucius managed to mention that Draco would taking the OWLs and would she say hello for them? hint hint. In fact, the more I think of it, the more the Malfoys seem like the Dursleys. Lucius is successful. He's on the board of Hogwarts. There are probably all sorts of times that Marchbanks and Malfoy are in the same setting. Business associates can be friendly without being friends. > From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon May 29 19:29:13 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 19:29:13 -0000 Subject: slight correction Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153087 Potioncat: When I wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if Marchbanks hasn't been to the > Malfoy home for dinner, that was my double negative idioms showing. it means, I think Marchbanks has been to the Malfoys for dinner. I just don't think she was there as a friend. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 19:28:33 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 19:28:33 -0000 Subject: Sectumsempra / ChapterDisc / Ogg&Pringle / lots more stuff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153088 Geoff: > I have previously commented somewhere that my take on 'sectumsempra' was that it was > derived from 'sectum' which is part of the verb 'seco' (= to cut) and 'semper' meaning > 'always' or 'forever' hinting that the spell creates permanent cuts. Carol responds: I agree that this reading is exactly what the Latin meaning indicates, which is why I don't think that the slight cut that young Severus inflicted on James after James had bullied him in the Pensieve scene was Sectumsempra. There's no indication that James was bleeding severely or that he was permanently scarred, and certainly Severus, the only one who knew the countercurse to Sectumsempra, didn't perform the countercurse on that occasion. (Can you imagine him singing over a bleeding James? I can't.) Since the Potions book was used during his sixth year, not his fifth, and since Sectumsempra is followed by the notation "for enemies," I think that Severus invented it after the Pensieve incident (which occurred in June of his fifth year) and possibly after the so-called Prank, which must have occurred in the following year. Granted, James uses another of the HBP's spells on Severus at that time, and that spell also appears in the sixth-year Potions book, but JKR does get confused on maths and time frames, so that could be a Flint. (How James could have learned a nonverbal spell from Severus, who certainly would not have taught it to him, also remains unexplained.) The rest of the evidence points to Sectumsempra as having been invented some time after the Pensieve scene as retribution for an act performed by an enemy or enemies, certainly MWPP and particularly James and Sirius. Possibly Sectumsempra, "cut *always*," is a variant of the simpler and less dangerous cutting hex used in the Pensieve scene, but that jinx or hex is too mild to be Sectumsempra, and the motivation for inventing Sectumsempra has not yet occurred or is only at that moment occurring. IOW, I think that the cutting hex used in the Pensieve scene is a precursor of Sectumsempra but not Sectumsempra itself. James is certainly not "cut always" and appears to be as unfazed as he would be by a stinging hex. Carol, hoping that her argument is clear From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon May 29 20:03:12 2006 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060529200312.39176.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153089 >> Magpie: >> Are you honestly telling me that you didn't get that that line of >> Draco's is about Draco blowing hot air to scare other students? >> Even with Neville following it up by saying that his family is >> friends with Marchbanks and she never speaks about the Malfoys? >> You think Marchbanks was in the Malfoy's pocket? > Alla: > > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I > mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , > would she mention it to her friend? > > I mean, why share the fact that you are being bribed with your > friend?.... > So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's > pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to > me. In that case, JKR has failed as an author, because it's quite clear that we're meant to see this as yet another pathetic attempt by Draco to bludgeon everyone with his oh-so-wonderful family connections and to have that effort punctured beautifully by Neville. Draco's efforts to impress are getting more threadbare every year, and what seemed barely understandable in an 11-year-old just away from home is totally sad in a 15-year-old who should know better by now. Griselda Marchbanks isn't in anyone's pocket, and the Lucius Malfoy we saw in COS who smacked down his son about his grades in front of a storekeeper doesn't strike me as the kind of dad who'd pull strings about something he figures Draco should be mastering anyway. Having a dud wizard as a son isn't something I can Lucius accepting placidly. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From oppen at mycns.net Mon May 29 20:27:34 2006 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 15:27:34 -0500 Subject: Severus Snape and the Forty-Seven Ronin References: <1148876474.6619.78983.m4@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003901c6835b$1673d3b0$b1560043@D6L2G391> No: HPFGUIDX 153090 I was thinking about the "Snape-as-Dumbledore's-Man" theories, and something I had read about in college (going for my BA in East Asian Studies) began niggling at me. If Snape is DD's Man, then his actions on the tower are rather similar to those of the Japanese heroes known as the Forty-Seven Ronin. For those not familiar with the story of the Forty-Seven Ronin, a potted version: In 1701, a minor lord was forced to commit _seppuku_ after being goaded into attacking another lord in a place where violence was forbidden. The lord's samurai became _ronin_ (literally, "wave men," a term for a samurai with no master---this was Not A Good Thing To Be for various reasons) and his estate was broken up. Forty-seven of the _ronin_ planned revenge, waiting for the right time. Some of them went on a course of open, blatant debauchery, figuring that this would lull suspicion about their actual intentions---the logic went that if they were making drunken, noisy fools of themselves, they wouldn't be plotting revenge. This sort of behavior was considered shameful in a samurai. Finally, on the right night, they struck, overwhelming the enemy lord's followers and taking his head. After they had placed the head on their dead lord's tombstone as proof that their vengeance had been accomplished, they were required to commit _seppuku_ themselves, for murder. Even though they officially died as criminals, they were hailed as heroes and exemplars of _bushido_ (the Japanese warrior code) for being willing to do anything, even things that samurai would not normally do, to avenge their lord's death. The resemblance to Snape-as-DD's-Man is pretty obvious. By killing Dumbledore, he's cemented his position as a Death Eater beyond anybody's ability to question it, even crazy Bellatrix. This puts him in the perfect position to throw spanners into Lord V's plans, if not AK him in the back at the crucial moment. For this, he's willing to suffer loss of his position at Hogwarts, execration as a traitor, and being hunted by the Aurors. Like the forty-seven ronin, he awaits the time to strike and knows that his prior behavor ensures that when he strikes, he can do so with complete surprise and a high chance of success. From carodave92 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 20:09:36 2006 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 20:09:36 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: <20060529200312.39176.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153091 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > >> Magpie: > >> Are you honestly telling me that you didn't get that that line of > >> Draco's is about Draco blowing hot air to scare other students? > >> Even with Neville following it up by saying that his family is > >> friends with Marchbanks and she never speaks about the Malfoys? > >> You think Marchbanks was in the Malfoy's pocket? > > > > Alla: > > > > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I > > mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , > > would she mention it to her friend? > > > > I mean, why share the fact that you are being bribed with your > > friend?.... > > So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's > > pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to > > me. > > Magda: > snip>...it's quite clear > that we're meant to see this as yet another pathetic attempt by Draco > to bludgeon everyone with his oh-so-wonderful family connections and > to have that effort punctured beautifully by Neville. Now Carodave: Wasn't Griselda Marchbanks one of the wizards who resigned in protest from the Wizengamot when DD was kicked off? I don't think she'd show support for DD there if she was in with the Malfoys. Carodave > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk Mon May 29 20:37:18 2006 From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 20:37:18 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153092 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: Carodave: > > Wasn't Griselda Marchbanks one of the wizards who resigned in > protest from the Wizengamot when DD was kicked off? I don't think > she'd show support for DD there if she was in with the Malfoys. She was indeed and there seems to be evidence that Fudge was then setting out to discredit her.... >From the Daily Prophet lead story "Ministry seeks educational reform; Dolores Umbridge appointed first ever High Inqisitor" and I quote: 'Wizengamot elders Griselda Marchbanks and Tiberius Ogden have resigned in protest at the introduction of the post of Inquisitor to Hogwarts. "Hogwarts is a school, not an outpost of Cornelius Fudge's office," said Madam Marchbanks. "This is a further disgusting attempt to discredit Albus Dumbledore." (For a full account of Madam Marchbanks' alleged links to subversive goblin groups, turn to page seventeen.)' (OOTP "The Hogwarts High Inquisitor" p.276 UK edition) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 20:49:02 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 20:49:02 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153093 a_svirn: > > But shouldn't we go with the "innocent until proven guilty" premise rather than "guilty until proven innocent"? Only in a really rotten society, oppressed and run by fear one remark from the likes of Draco Malfoy would suffice to ruin a venerable doyen's reputation. > > > > Alla: > > Well, yes, of course. "Innocent till proven guilty", but should we > also automatically discard Draco's testimony just because we want > him to be good in something and he may not be so? (Replying in > general, not just to your argument) > > I mean, don't get me wrong - Marchbank may not be in Malfoy's > pocket, she likely is not as in 'taking bribes", but why wouldn't > she come for dinner as one Ministry employee to another? > > Carol's point about her residing her position at Wisengamot to > protest Umbridge appointment speaks very well of her integrity, of > course. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/153058 > > I don't think her being friends with Dumbledore is relevant though, > since as we know Dumbledore thought that Fake!Moody was his friend > too Carol: Thanks for acknowledging my point about Madam Marchbanks resigning her position on the Wizengamot speaking well of her integrity. My point was not only that Madam Marchbanks seems to be a person of unimpeachable courage and integrity, a friend and supporter of Dumbledore and an opponent of Umbridge, but also that there's no indication whatever of unfairness in the OWL grading. Even if Madam Marchbanks visited the Malfoys as Draco claims, and we know that Draco doesn't always tell the truth, it's highly unlikely that she was influenced by them. She is clearly opposed to the Ministry's interference at Hogwarts; she and her friends are all Dumbledore supporters; and she is not afraid to stand up for what she believes in. Interestingly, Professor Tofty is also a friend of Tiberius Ogden's (the other person who resigned from the Wizengamot in protest of Umbridge's takeover). The OWL examiners in general seem to be ancient witches and wizards of unimpeachable integrity. There is not one shred of evidence that they grade the OWLs unfairly, as Harry's, Ron's, and Hermione's marks all indicate. (We can quibble about Hermione's E in DADA, but that is not Professor Marchbanks' doing.) As for her being DD's friend not being relevant because DD was fooled by Crouch!Moody, are you suggesting that she and the other examiners are polyjuiced DEs? That seems unlikely in the extreme. > Alla: > Lucius KNOWS people, I see no reason to not think that Marchbank is > one of them. Carol: Quite true. But knowing people and being influenced or intimidated by them are two different things. Madam Marchbanks may know Lucius Malfoy, but knowing him is not likely to influence her in favor of his son. If anything, it would cause her to keep a close eye on Draco to be sure that he's not cheating. Alla: > > And to go back to Draco's potion making skills - there is one > reference which Carol brought up earlier that he cut the plants > well, but there is NO reference of Snape ever praising his potion, > not ONCE ( as far as I remember of course), but there is plenty of > evidence that Draco is sucking up to all teachers AND there is an > evidence that Snape has a very long special connection to Malfoys > family. Carol: I didn't say anything about Draco's cutting skills, though I see no reason to doubt them considering that he was faking an injured arm and manipulating Ron in that scene. I believe it was Magpie who discussed that scene. I did bring up "the perfect way that Draco stewed his slugs" in the very first lesson. I very much doubt that Snape would have called attention to the slugs unless they were indeed stewed perfectly. Sucking up to teachers has no connection to Draco's abilities. Neither Snape nor McGonagall is going to be fooled by such tactics. As I said, we see no evidence of Draco's potions ever turning out like cement or shooting off green sparks or of his having any sort of difficulty with them. Had that happened, Harry or Hermione would have noticed, just as they notice Goyle's. But sucking up to teachers has no bearing on Draco's OWL Potions mark, which is not given by a teacher but by Madam Marchbanks, whose integrity I have already established. Alla: > Malfoy is in on a lot of information that Harry is not. As I quote > upthread he knows about Triwizard tournament earlier than Harry and > co do, he also knows lots about Sirius Black, even that Black > supposedly betrayed Harry's parents, while Harry still has no clue. Carol: I moved this point out of the discussion of Madam Marchbanks because I don't think it has any bearing on Madam M's integrity. I do, however, agree that Draco knows things he shouldn't know, and there is only one person who could have told him these things--his father. Draco comes to school perfectly willing to be friends with Harry and even introduces himself and his friends to Harry on the train. I suspect he does so because Lucius has hinted that Harry may be the next Dark Lord in the making. (Snape says in "Spinner's End" that many of the DEs thought that Baby!Harry's innate Dark magic enabled him to defeat the Dark Lord.) Snape's first Potions lesson dispels this illusion. In CoS, Draco (whose father put the diary in Ginny's cauldron as part of his plot to bring down the "Mudblood-lover" Dumbledore by opening the Chamber of Secrets) knows that when the Chamber of Secrets was opened before, "a Mudblood died." He has clearly gathered that much from his father, who nevertheless has not revealed to him who the Heir of Slytherin is or even the nature of the monster in the Chamber. (I'm not sure that Lucius himself knows that it's a Basilisk.) In PoA, Draco taunts Harry about Sirius Black: ("If it were me, I'd want revenge!" quoted from memory.) Clearly he knows, as Harry does not, that the Potters' supposed betrayer was their good friend. He may even know that Black was Harry's godfather. It's unclear whether Draco has overheard his parents talking or whether Lucius directly informed him, but Draco uses his superior knowledge to taunt Harry. In GoF, he taunts Ron with not knowing about the TWT, which his own father (who has connections with Fudge) has told him about, whereas Ron's father has kept it quiet. (He does, however, know about it, as does Percy.) In OoP, Draco makes a sarcastic remark about "*dogging* his footsteps, which Harry and Hermione correctly interpret to mean that Lucius has seen Sirius Black in dog form on Platform 9 3/4. Later Snape informs Black that Malfoy Sr. has indeed seen him. Still later, an article appears in the Daily Prophet indicating that a reliable source, clearly Lucius Malfoy, has reported to the Ministry (probably directly to Fudge) that Black is hiding in London. Draco also has some idea about Hagrid's embassy to the giants, taunting Harry that maybe Hagrid is involved in something "too big" for him to handle. Of course, Macnair, who also goes to see the giants, would know about Hagrid, and Macnair is both a Ministry employee and a DE. So either through Fudge or Macnair, Lucius Malfoy knows about Hagrid's mission to the giants and has passed this tidbit on to Draco, who of course has a grudge of his own against Hagrid because of the Buckbeak incident. At any rate, I'm not sure what point you're making here. Yes, Draco knows more than he should about matters that are more Harry's business than his (matters about which no one has bothered to inform Harry), but the explanation is simple. Lucius Malfoy (until his arrest) has both DE and Ministry connections, and is on close personal terms with Fudge. But none of this has any bearing on Draco's marks in Potions, either in Snape's class or on his Potions OWL. Draco only knows what he knows because of his adored father's connections--and he flaunts his superior knowledge, such as it is, in front of Harry and Ron to torment them. He certainly does not use it to improve his marks, either in his classes or on his OWLS. Carol, still seeing no evidence that Draco did not deserve an O on his Potions OWL or that Draco could in any way influence Madam Marchbanks From celizwh at intergate.com Mon May 29 22:14:51 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 22:14:51 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153094 Lanval: > Oh no, you misunderstood me then. My argument was that > niceness/kindness cannot simply be ignored, or looked at with > contempt, when judging a characters 'goodness'. > > Let me try again. > > Character A works for the side of good, but is a > generally nasty, disagreeable person. He tends to > hurt others by his attitude. > > Character B also works for the side of good, but is > generally a friendly and kind person. He rarely hurts > others by his attitude. houyhnhnm: I do not look at niceness with contempt. My problem with Lupin has nothing to do with his niceness. He was my favorite character from the time he was intoduced in PoA up until the pensieve scene in OotP. I glossed right over his unprofessionable behavior toward Snape, his failure to come clean with Dumbledore, his recklessness in rushing out without taking his potion, his willingness to participate in a summary execution, even the recounting of his behavior as a Marauder when he was supposed to have been staying in the Shrieking Shack during his transformations for the protection of Hogwarts. I could not overlook his failure to step in, when he was a *prefect*, and his friends were tormenting another student just because "he exists". My attitute toward Lupin and Snape, whom I had previously loved to hate, began to change at that time. I re-read PoA and I began to see Lupin's behavior in a very different light. As a child werewolf, Lupin had no hope of attending school. Dumbledore made it possible for him to do so; he even made him a prefect. Lupin repaid Dumbledore by abdicating his responsibility as a prefect and running loose as a werewolf with his three friends, thereby putting the whole community at risk. As an adult werewolf, Lupin had no hope of gainful employment. Again Dumbledore gave him a chance, and again Lupin betrayed Dumbledore's trust. These are serious transgressions. Yes, Lupin felt bad about what he was doing or failing to do, but the bad feelings *never changed his behavior*. Snape's transgressions are worse. I grant that. Even if he never participated in an act of murder or torture, if he slithered out of action every time, whatever he did do may have enabled the murdering and torturing, and just by joining the Death Eaters, IMO, he shares responsibility for whatever acts they committed. The difference is that when Snape realized what he was doing was wrong, *he changed his ways* [I know some people don't think so, but for me it is a settled question. I'm not going to argue DDM vs ESE! Snape anymore]. And he did so with very little prospect of ever being rewarded. What keeps people nice or good most of the time? Are we not nice partly because we want others to be nice to us? Are we not good because we want our family and our friends to think well of us rather than ill? Isn't it a kind of social inertia that keeps most people on the straight and narrow? Lupin wants to be liked so badly he is willing to compromise his values and commit acts he knows are wrong. Snape, who had cut all ties to the law-abiding WW, wrenched himself from his headlong fall into evil and set himself back on the right path because, when brought face-to-face with what he had become, he rejected evil and chose good for its own sake alone. He will never be liked by those he has rejoined. Your hypothetical character B may be better than character A, but neither is a very good match with any actual character in the Harry Potter books. Too much has been left out. From belviso at attglobal.net Mon May 29 22:38:37 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 22:38:37 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153097 So sorry to be posting this again, but I managed to cut off half of it. Alla: Neri is a "he", as far as I know :). Magpie: Oops! Sorry Neri. Alla: That's the thing though - to me Neville does not show that Draco exaggerates here, although it certainly can be read that way, I understand, I just don't see the reason to discard the other possibility. Magpie: But what is the other possibility and why isn't it revealed later? That Marchbanks is actually best buds with the Malfoys and so fixing exams? > Magpie: > Yes, Snape's relationship with Draco goes beyond his performance in Potions,> that's clear. But that doesn't mean he can't get an O on his test. Alla: Yes, he could get an O on his test. My point is that I don't see signs in canon that he did. If JKR considers this to be not an important detail that can go in without any foreshadowing, than sure, he could get any grade for all I know. Magpie: I don't understand how there are no signs in canon that he got an O on his test when he's sitting there with his books in Advanced Potions. Draco's always being cocky in Potions, going along fine in class as a favorite with Severus "I expect results" Snape--why would it need special explanation? He's not parting the Red Sea here, he's just getting a lot of the questions right on a test and mixing a Potion correctly. > Magpie: > No one is arguing that Snape favors Malfoy *because* he's a good student. > We know Snape's favor of Malfoy is personal. We're saying that he still > also does well in his class, which isn't that remarkable. If he didn't, imo, > Snape's favor would come across very differently. Alla: Okay, first of all then I misundertood you completely. Didn't you said somewhere upthread that Snape favors Draco BECAUSE he gets good grades, because he is a good student? I apologise if this was not your point. Magpie: No, sorry if I wasn't clear. I think that Draco's being good in Potions is part of his ongoing relationship with Snape--I think his relationship with Snape also probably gives him reason to want to do well in the class. I can't imagine Snape having a favorite who wasn't performing up to his standard, but I don't think that means Draco is Snape's favorite because he wowed him in Potions. We know he's connected to Draco's father, and they seem to also like each other personally. Alla: And as I said above I don't see the signs of Draco doing well in class, it is not necessarily contradicted by canon ( although I agree with Neri - if one is good at something, usually one does not feel a need to suck up in the first place IMO), but it is not shown there either. Magpie: Draco *likes* Snape, so what Harry sees as sucking up does not have to be that. We never see him manipulating anything out of Snape through flattery (or anybody managing to do that with Snape!) or even needing to in class. The OWLS are independent of Snape, and I think rather than two separate explanations for why he's not really as well as suggested it's easier to just put the two things together, since they don't conflict. Alla: And how differently Snape favor would come across if Darco was not a good student in your opinion? Magpie: Snape would be frustrated and having to excuse Draco's not doing well. His favoritism would conflict with Draco's performance. Harry would love it. I don't know if Snape could stand it.:-) Actually, Snape/Draco seems to sometimes provide a bit of an alternate Harry/DD. Both men may have set out with an agenda for the boy in question but wound up relating in unexpected ways once the boy was a real person in front of them. houyhnhnm: When lack of discrimination combines with judgementalism you get the worst kind of Hufflepuff; you get Zacharias Smith. Magpie: I thought Zach was great.:-) He's didn't really ask for the "other side" from Harry, he just asks Harry to prove why Zach should trust him, which seemed very Hufflepuff. Ernie already had reason to trust Harry due to his family. I was frankly amazed at how hated Zach was in HBP. It's not that I thought Zach was completely likeable, but the total rejection of him seemed to me to say more about the inability of the characters to deal with people who didn't agree fast enough. >From what I've seen in the books, Hufflepuffs have the usual downside of salt of the earth types. Much like hobbits, they can be suspicious of outsiders, resentful of people when they think they are trying to put one over on them and we know people put them down as duffers even though we've seen impressive Hufflepuffs. I always have this vague impression of Hufflepuff as the mob house, like the way on Andy Griffith Show the great citizens of Mayberry go a little crazy when strangers show up. Ravenclaws seem more the types to keep their mind open too much, certainly from Harry's pov. Marietta's not totally on Harry's side, Cho angers Harry by seeing Marietta's side etc. Slytherins are outrageously emotional so no question about their watery qualities, and Gryffindors are definitely fiery. -m From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 19:22:25 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 19:22:25 -0000 Subject: Thoughts on Umbridge (long) (Was: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153098 > > Carol: > Granted, she's not meant to be a terrifying figure like the slit- nosed > monster Voldemort, but she's certainly meant to be revolting from the > start. The pink cardigan and "Alice band" and kittens are all part of > a little-girl image that contrasts absurdly with her pouchy eyes and > wide toadlike mouth with little pointy teeth. (A toad with teeth?) The > absurd contrast between her appearance and behavior verges on the > comic, like the caricatures of politicians in political cartoons, and > yet it's never truly comic because we know from the first that she's > out to get Harry. (I suspect, as I said in another post, that she's > manipulated Fudge into viewing both him and DD as dangerous to the > MoM, but I've already stated my views on that topic.) > Lanval: Yes, it's true that we see through Umbridge's fake niceness very soon, and perceive her as revolting. Though I still think that her appearance, while bizarre and anything but endearing, still gives a false sense of 'harmlessness' to most of the students, who know nothing of her behavior at Harry's trial. Carol: > Before I continue along this line, looking at Umbridge herself in the > classroom, let me note that she reminds me of two diametrically > opposed characters from literature, Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor, who > believed that the mass of people could not think for themselves and > had to be led and cared for like sheep (anyone who tried to persuade > them to think for themselves was a troublemaker who had to be killed > for the public good--Harry's detentions, anyone?) Lanval: The title Umbridge takes on may well have been intended by JKR to make the connection to Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor, though she may have only picked it for the general association with the Inquisition that most readers (the older ones, anyway) would draw from it, without having any specific literary character in mind. But it's an interesting idea. Carol: and Dickens's > Wackford Squeers, the sadistic schoolmaster who "teaches" the boys at > Dotheboys Hall by providing them with useless and inaccurate > information and beating or starving them into submission. The Grand > Inquisitor believes that he's acting for the good of the common people > by maintaining their ignorance and dependence on him and others like > him; Squeers is a caricature of a schoolmaster whose name and > appearance are darkly comic, as Umbridge's are, who sadistically > abuses his pupils for his own advantage without giving them the > education their parents or guardians are paying for. (Obviously there > are differences here, but Dickens is satirizing a certain type of > school that really existed in his time in the hope of calling public > attention to the abuse, and I'm wondering if JKR is doing something > similar with Umbridge.) Lanval: This strikes me as perhaps more likely. While Squeers and Umbridge are somewhat different in approach (and it's been a while since I've read 'Nicholas Nickleby',but I'm extremely fond of Jim Broadbent's portrayal of Squeers in the most recent movie version! *g*) and intent, the use of Umbridge-as-satire of educational systems' various ills is certainly possible, and would not have gone over people's heads. Especially the swipes she takes at 'theoretical approach'. Carol: > And there's the whole matter of teaching defensive *theory* instead of > practical defense. Obviously such a class (in contrast to Snape's) is worse than useless > in preparing students to confront Voldemort and the Death Eaters, and > is intended to perpetuate the official Ministry position that LV is > not returning. But I'm wondering is it's also a caricature of > educational theory, or theory in general. The textbook is as boring as > Professor Binns' lectures; the words slide through Harry's brain > without making any impression (240). The three goals of the class, > which remind me of the "behavioral objectives" I was supposed to > formulate in creating a lesson plan back in those useless education > classes I took in the 70s, reveal the uselessness of the theory > they're learning, particularly the third one: "Placing the use of > defensive magic in a context for practical use" (340). "Placing "use" > in a context for "use"? What? Come again? Do these words mean > anything, or are they just a circular waffle? (Which reminds me of the > title and author of one of the first-year textbooks, "Magical Theory" > by Adalbert *Waffling*.) Lanval: Well, being that satirizing the RW by showing some of the wackier side of WW is one of the funniest aspects of the books, I would certainly think this to be true. Carol: > So: allegory, caricature, satire, attacks on bureaucracy and the type > of "education" (indoctrination) that expects students to be attentive > little children passively absorbing approved theories and principles, > possible connections to Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor who wants to > relieve the masses of responsibility so that they can remain happily > ignorant and punishes (kills) troublemakers who raise doubts in their > minds. What does it all mean? Does the depiction of Umbridge have any > relevance to educational trends in the UK or the "dumbing down" of > education? Surely it's more than a plot device to get a bureaucrat > into Hogwarts to thwart the students' practical training in DADA and > usurp control through her increasingly invasive decrees. > > Or are we just supposed to hate her because she's mean to Harry? Lanval: No, clearly not! :) I agree that the there are traces of the Grand Inquisitor/the Inquisition in general, as well as some of the sadism of Squeers evident in Umbridge... and precisely because of this association with characters of that type, I believe that Umbridge, while an allegory of Bureaucracy from Hell, pointless educational waffle, the "dumbing down" effect... ALSO stands for something far more sinister, and on a larger scale. Umbridge, to me, is all about absolute control, about complete ruthlessless to achieve that end, and the danger of going completely overboard. Such as torture, and even murder. The similarity of certain historical and political movements to Umbridge's 'taking over Hogwarts' cannot have been unintentional, IMO. So... Umbridge, an allegory within an allegory, then? Hogwarts as an allegory of society in general? Thanks for your thoughts, Carol! Sorry I can't come up with a more detailed analysis, Memorial Day kind of got in the way. > From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon May 29 23:41:15 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 23:41:15 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory In-Reply-To: <20060529124259.23336.qmail@web36804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153099 CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 17, A Sluggish Memory > Harry . . . describes the conversation he overheard between Snape and Draco. Predictably, [Hermione's] reaction resembles Lupin's and Arthur Weasley's, but she does concede that Draco is obviously up to something. At the same time, she suggests that Draco's "master" might be his father, not Lord Voldemort. Carol responds: Since you didn't ask about Hermione's reaction in your questions, let me just comment here that I found her suggestion that Lucius might be Draco's "master" more than a bit odd, especially given that Lucius is in Azkaban and Draco is hardly likely to learn Occlumency to keep anything from him. Both Draco and Harry understand that Snape means Voldemort, but Hermione seems to be reaching desperately for some other explanation that will get Draco off the hook. Consequently, she misses Snape's use of "your master" rather than "our master," which to me is a giveaway that he's Dumbledore's man working against great odds to rescue Draco from Voldemort. Questions: > > 1. Early in the chapter, Harry and Hermione have the following exchange: > > I first presumed this was fairly straightforward. Harry wants Hermione to stop being petty over Ron and she replies not as long as she remembers the past (unlike someone who had been on a bender). Upon rereading it, however, it sounds much more ambiguous. Carol: I think your first reaction is the correct one. Hermione has had a dull Muggle Christmas with her parents and is still annoyed at Ron. Her earlier reactions to the Fat Lady's overindulgence (rolled eyes) suggests that she's mildly contemptuous of the Fat Lady's mode of celebration, but I don't think it has any connection with Ron's adolescent infatuation, or rather, his newfound appreciation for snogging and a willing partner in the sport. She's not mildly contemptuous of Ron; she's furious. (Oddly, she's not remotely jealous of Lavender, perhaps indicating that she knows that Ron has no feelings for her other than perhaps a mild attraction.) I don't see any ambiguity, but maybe I'm overlooking something. > > 2. When the other sixth-years learn Harry has experienced Apparition, they pelt him with questions. Given how many of them come from wizarding families, why do they grill Harry? Why not ask Mom, Dad, or cousin Fergus? Carol: Because Harry is right there in the classroom and is in their year. Besides, cousin Fergus, if he were present, would be no more likely than Fred and George to answer their questions. He would probably just gloat knowingly, like a Muggle kid who has his driver's license being grilled by his twelve-year-old brother. > > 3. Once again, Professor Flitwick provides comedy relief. Is this his role in the series, or will he play a more profound role by the end? Carol: I loved this scene, and I'm going to miss Professor Flitwick's classes for the comic relief they provide. But I don't believe for a moment that he was a duelling champion in school (that sounds like a joke to me). If he has any role to play, maybe it will relate to the goblins. (Didn't JKR say that he has a goblin ancestor?) But whatever role he plays, if any, in Book 7 is likely to be small. A casualty, maybe. > > 4. In the scene when Harry confides his concerns about the Snape/Draco conversation, we have a Harry who is feeling wronged but takes the high road, refraining from arguing. This is markedly different from his confrontations with Umbridge in Order of the Phoenix. Can we attribute that to his respect for Dumbledore, his added maturity, or both? Carol: In an odd way, Umbridge's cruel detentions contributed to his self-control. He was determined not to let her see that she was getting to him, and he held his temper in check when she told him that the detentions were designed to teach him not to tell evil, attention-seeking stories (I'm forgetting an adjective but am too lazy to look up the quote). And I think that the invasions of his mind by Voldemort via the scar connection affected his self-control, making him almost constantly angry in OoP. In HBP he's more himself, except that he's projecting all the blame for Sirius's death onto Snape. (Okay, I guess that's also being himself!) But aside from Snape, and his understandable obsession with DE!Draco, he seems to be doing a better job of dealing with other people--less judgmental, less prone to jump to conclusions with people like Neville and Luna, much more controlled and grown up in dealing with people like Scrimgeour. So with Dumbledore, whom he knows and trusts (and who is speaking to him again, unlike OoP), he's willing to be calm and respectful even though he disagrees. But I think he also knows that he could never win an argument with Dumbledore and is afraid of sabotaging the lessons. BTW, you didn't ask, but I'm pretty sure that Dumbledore does indeed know more than Harry about what's going on, including all three provisions of the UV and those mysterious reasons for trusting Snape. And he is still, at this point, withholding information about his injured hand and Snape's role in saving him from the ring Horcrux, perhaps because they don't yet have the unaltered Horcrux memory. (Will we ever hear the whole "thrilling tale" that DD promised and never told?) > > 5. With Tom Riddle, Dumbledore again demonstrates his belief in second chances. This could build the case for "See, he was right to give second chances," or "Here's an early demonstration of his tragic flaw." Which do you believe will be the eventual outcome? Carol: Dumbledore gives Tom a second chance but is never taken in by him, never trusts him, keeps an eye on him throughout his career at Hogwarts and knows exactly who really killed the Riddle family. He does not interfere with Tom or reveal what he knows (though he does try to clear Morfin), but he knows early on that Tom has blown his chance. There is no third chance. When Voldemort applies for the DADA position, Dumbledore turns him down firmly and absolutely, telling him straight out that he knows what Voldemort has become, a murderer and the leader of the supposedly secret Death Eaters. No wonder Voldemort fears him. Snape is an entirely different matter. He spied for Dumbledore at great personal risk before Godric's Hollow, AFWK he does what Dumbledore asks of him both as teacher and Order member, and Dumbledore continues to trust him. Dumbledore is an excellent judge of character, and I'm not sure that he was entirely taken in by Crouch!Moody (he just can't put his finger on the answer to the mystery, but he's "sifting" memories in the Pensieve trying to find it). The fact that Voldemort blew his second chance does not make Dumbledore wrong to grant them to others, from Hagrid (expelled from Hogwarts for bringing in Aragog, which was utterly thoughtless and irresponsible regardless of the fact that Aragog didn't kill Moaning Myrtle) to Firenze, who has "betrayed" his herd. Giving Snape a second chance was the right thing to do, regardless of Snape's true loyalties. I believe that it was also a wise thing to do, turning Snape into Dumbledore's man as firmly as denying him that second chance would have turned him into a confirmed Death Eater. I am certain that Book 7 will show Dumbledore's choice to be not only merciful but wise and just. IMO, Dumbledore is not the "stupid old man" that Draco believes him to be but "the epitome of goodness" (and wisdom) who knows exactly where Snape's loyalties lie and what sacrifices he is willing to make to thwart Voldemort. I will be very surprised if Dumbledore is proven wrong in his judgment and giving second chances turns out to be a tragic flaw. That's a very harsh and IMO very dangerous lesson to teach her young readers. > > 6. Dumbledore describes the group of Tom's friends as "a mixture of the weak seeking protection, the ambitious seeking some shared glory, and the thuggish, gravitating towards a leader who could show them more refined forms of cruelty." Can we apply this description to any other groups in the series, both within and outside of Hogwarts? Carol: At Hogwarts now I don't see any examples of "the weak seeking protection," but Wormtail clearly fits that category in terms of the current DEs. Maybe Nott, who seems to be one of the original DEs, also fits this category. He seems like a cringing, weak old man in GoF. Draco (who is also determined to avenge his father's arrest) could fit loosely into the "ambitious seeking some shared glory" (though his hopes for glory are later overshadowed by his fears for himself and his family). Gregory Goyle and Vincent Crabbe, Draco's thuggish followers, seem at first glance to fit into the "thuggish gravitating towards a leader" category, though that leader is Draco, not LV (their fathers are another matter). But HBP finally begins to differentiate CrabbenGoyle, with Goyle, the dumber of the two, still loyally and mindlessly doing Draco's bidding, even transforming into a little girl by drinking polyjuice, but Crabbe starts to ask questions and even looks mutinous during the first Apparition lesson. Both of them look lost without Draco at the end of the book. I don't think that either of them is looking for "more refined forms of cruelty," only for someone else to tell them what to do. Of the Death Eaters, I would place the axe-wielding Macnair in this category. Voldemort promises him more interesting and challenging victims than hippogriffs in the graveyard scene in GoF, and he later acts as ambassador to the giants, perhaps finding some way to scare them into submission. And Dolohov is simply cruel and evil by nature; I don't think that he would seek more refined forms of cruelty unless the Unforgiveable Curses were taught to him by LV. My impression is that he has already mastered cruelty on his own. And Bellatrix certainly wanted to learn whatever she could from her master, but I wouldn't characterize her as thuggish, only a fanatic whose brains have been addled by the Unforgiveable Curses. Young Barty, too, though he may have fit in the "ambitious" category. Anyway, we don't know the original DEs very well (some of them only by name) so it's hard to categorize them. But I suspect that some DEs, old and new, fall into more than one category or don't quite fit any of them. (Rabastan Lestrange as the devoted follower of his sister-in-law? Now that's strange!) > > 7. We now have some explanation of how detection of underage magic works and the Ministry's decision to allow families to monitor their own children. Did you find this to match your earlier presumptions? Do you agree with Harry that this policy is "rubbish"? Carol: It does fit with my preconceptions, but I don't think it's "rubbish." As long as the parents can control their kids and the kids are under the impression that their magic is detectable and can be distinguished from their parents', it probably serves as a deterrent (even if it is, erm, misleading). Unfortunately, it's the responsible parents who will enforce it, and kids like Severus Snape can still come to school knowing more hexes than most sixth years. (That to me pretty much indicates that Muggle Tobias was long since out of the picture and witch mom Eileen certainly didn't enforce the law for her son.) So, not "rubbish," exactly, but by no means as effective as it ought to be in preventing underage wizards from practicing magic under uncontrolled conditions. > > 8. Just how *did* Slughorn tamper with his memory? Carol: He added cornstarch to congeal it. > > 9. Does the Slughorn memory scene help build the case for the Good Slytherin? Carol: Not really. Slughorn isn't evil, but he's weak and self-serving. If he were the Good Slytherin (who BTW is our own invention, I believe; JKR herseld hasn't used the term to my knowledge), he'd have given DD the unaltered memory in the first place. He does at least show that not all Slytherins are murderers or approve of murder, which should help to dispel the idea that Slytherin House is evil in itself. I'm still holding out hope for Theo Nott, who may see what happened to Draco and be shocked into realizing that he doesn't want to follow his father down the road to Azkaban. (Blaise Zabini I think we can just dismiss as another arrogant "Mudblood" hater, too indolent and too much in love with himself to join the DEs. But Good Slytherin he isn't, IMO.) > > 10. Harry (and Phineas) thinks Dumbledore could get the accurate memory without Harry's help. Does Dumbledore have a larger purpose in setting Harry with the task? Carol: Sure he does. He wants Harry to develop to put his Slytherin qualities, including cunning and resourcefulness, to good use. (And Phineas, knowing that the boy is a Gryffindor, is understandably skeptical about his ability to accomplish the task.) > > 11. Fawkes "speaks" twice in this scene, once after Harry calls himself Dumbledore's man and once after Dumbledore replies to Phineas. What is the significance of the placement of these two cries? > Carol: Fawkes has a clear connection with Harry, coming to his aid in CoS because of his loyalty to Dumbledore, and his tail feather somehow aids Harry in building the golden dome and so forth in the GoF graveyard scene--the Phoenix song that encourages Harry has the opposite effect on LV. Fawkes' first cry strikes me as a cry of approval or agreement or solidarity; he, too, is loyal to Dumbledore (and more than loyal since a Phoenix, perhaps Fawkes himself, is DD's Patronus or spirit guardian). I'm not sure about the second cry, but maybe it's a note of agreement, a vote of confidence in Harry. If so, it's ironic that the red-and-gold Fawkes, himself a symbol of Gryffindor (or all that's best in Gryffindor, especially moral courage?) as well as of immortality, would second Dumbledore's belief in Harry's Slytherin qualities, including the subtle manipulation required to obtain the unaltered memory. Carol, having fun as usual with the chapter discussions and apologizing to anyone who made it this far for the length of her post From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Mon May 29 23:47:52 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 00:47:52 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <447B8828.5050600@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153100 dumbledore11214 wrote: >> >> Magpie: >> Are you honestly telling me that you didn't get that that line of > Draco's is >> about Draco blowing hot air to scare other students? Even with > Neville >> following it up by saying that his family is friends with > Marchbanks and she >> never speaks about the Malfoys? You think Marchbanks was in the > Malfoy's >> pocket? >> > > Alla: > > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I > mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , > would she mention it to her friend? > > I mean, why share the fact that you are being bribed with your > friend? > I would not go there if I were you. :-) The whole "Snape is a rotten teacher" theory based largely on the fact that Harry and Neville performed better when he was not present during the exam. I remember you and other listees of the similar disposition mentioning this point many times. Now, the whole "performed better" thing is only meaningful if OWLs results are impartial and objective. If Marchbanks can be influenced by bribes and friendly dinners, then this whole argument goes down the drain, don't you see? Harry and Neville passed their potions OWL because she likes Harry, and she is friends with Neville's granny, but they are really as rubbish in Potions as Snape always thought. See, aren't you better off allowing Malfoy to have his 'O'? :-) Irene From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue May 30 00:17:06 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 17:17:06 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306443723.20060529171706@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153101 Good questions for Ch.17 discussions, but I have an additional one to add that occurred to me as I re-read it... DD mentions that the MoM was able to determine that the Riddles were murdered with Morfin's wand. Presumably it was ascertained with _Priori Incantatum_... But if they used PI to extract the "echoes" of the slain Riddles, why didn't the "echoes" name their true killer? -- Dave From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 30 00:15:25 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 00:15:25 -0000 Subject: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153102 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pforparvati" > wrote: > > > > But still why are we supporting this theory, when Harry himself > > is not able to relate those two lockets. > > > > Tonks: > Harry doesn't relate the two lockets for the same reason he > doesn't know that Aberforth is the bartender at the Hogshead and > the fact that he didn't realize that if he couldn't see Draco on > the map and Draco wasn't in Hogsmead that Draco must `obviously' > be in the ROR. Because sometimes Harry doesn't think and he has > not learned to be very observent. He also isn't able to use his > full abilities when he is under emotional stress. If he wants to > be an Auror he has a bit more learning to do. > > Tonks_op bboyminn: While I don't disagree with anything Tonks said; in fact, I think she is very close to the mark, I think there is one additional aspect that helps explain Harry's frequent lack of comprehension, and that is context. Using myself as a model, I find that people I know quite well in a specific context, I don't seem to know at all in a completely foriegn contexts. For example, there are many people that I work with, and in the context of work, I have no problem remembering their names, but if I meet them outside that context, say at the 'State Fair' or at the shopping mall, I frequently draw a complete blank on who they are. I know that I know them, but can't remember their names, or where I know them from. Shifting this to Harry, Harry doesn't make the connection between the Grimmauld Place locket and the Slytherin locket because the context of those two items is so diverse. The Grimmauld Place locket is a curious trinket among many more fastinating trinkets that got thrown away. Since it was thrown away, he has, in a manner of speaking, removed it from his mind; forgotten about it. I'm sure he is very focused on the Slytherin locket and certainly remembers what it looks like, but without something to jog his memory, with out something to bring those two diverse contexts together, he has no reason to associate the two. When that context connection is made, Harry will remember the Grimmauld Place locket, and remember that it looks very much like the Slytherin locket and go looking for it. So, lacking a contextual association between to seemly diverse lockets, Harry doesn't make the connection. As soon a contextual association does arise that makes that connnection, Harry will remember the Grimmauld Place locket and understand its significants. Kind of a round-about way of putting it, but I think you still get my meaning. Steve/bboyminn From BrwNeil at aol.com Tue May 30 01:39:16 2006 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 21:39:16 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? Message-ID: <3b9.2d6ea12.31acfc44@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153103 In a message dated 5/29/2006 8:28:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, bboyminn at yahoo.com writes: No: HPFGUIDX 153104 houyhnhnm: The bad expression of a characteristic can be an exaggeration of the trait as in courageous/reckless or fairminded/indiscriminant, but it can also be the opposite as in just/judgemental. Or maybe being judgemental is really an exaggeration, too, of being just, one that goes so far, it ends up as an opposite. Your example of the Hufflepuff's reaction to Harry in CoS is a good one of Hufflepuff judgementalism. Maybe Zacharius Smith is an example of being "so open-minded that your brains fall out", at the Hog's Head meeting, when he insists on hearing both sides in the You-Know-Who-is-back-or-he-isn't debate even though the time has clearly come for action. He is also judgemental when he is announcer at the Quidditch match. Julie: I'm not sure I see the insisting on hearing both sides of the debate as judgmental so much as cautious. Hufflepuffs act with deliberation, rather than from their instincts (Gryffindors) or based on logical determination (Ravenclaws). At least it's not judgmental in the way the word is most frequently used. houyhnhnm: When lack of discrimination combines with judgementalism you get the worst kind of Hufflepuff; you get Zacharias Smith. Julie: I don't think he's the *worst* kind of Hufflepuff. I'm still assuming that all the houses have produced a Death Eater or two, just as Slytherin must have produced many who *didn't* become Death Eaters. It does make me wonder what would lead a person in each given house to become a Death Eater? I think with the Hufflepuffs it could be their trait of loyalness that would be their downfall. For instance, if a Hufflepuff student had a parent who was a Death Eater, loyalty to family might induce the student to join the Death Eaters. Or if Tom Riddle, manipulative charmer that he was, engendered loyalty in some Hufflepuff students during his own student years, those Hufflepuffs might have willingly followed him, remaining loyal to *him* rather than having any real allegiance to his cause. With Ravenclaws, loyalty to Voldemort would most likely be ascertained by promises of intellectual freedom that some might feel is denied them by the WWs societal strictures. I agree with houyhnhnm that detachment and lack of involvement would be traits common to Ravenclaws, who would tend to make decisions based on rationality and logic rather than on emotional feelings like compassion or kindness. Take this detachment to an extreme, and a Ravenclaw could lose all concern for his or her fellow beings, becoming to all intents and purposes amoral. Slytherins obviously would be most driven by their ambition, which can be a good motivator but taken to extreme can lead one to do whatever it takes to get to the "top" including serving Voldemort's cause in exchange for whatever power he might promise. Gryffindor is perhaps the hardest one to peg, as our one known "bad" Gryffindor, Peter, seems so very non-Gryffndorish. To me, the Gryffindor trait of courage which can become recklessness, and the Gryffindor love of risk and excitement would seem to be the traits that could be turned toward evil. A Gryffindor who is recklessly brave, who craves risk, might well join Voldemort simply for the challenge of the fight, for the chance to take on the best of the WW, the Aurors. Oddly, this would fit for the risk-taking Sirius, if he'd had fewer principles. But this obviously isn't Peter's motivation, and I have more trouble pegging Peter into his house than any other HP character (talk about a square peg in a round hole!). Of course, Snape would make a fine Ravenclaw too, and Bellatrix with her insane brand of loyalty might have made a good Hufflepuff ;-) Obviously any turn to evil and/or Voldemort's side has to involve more than just a particular trait taken to an extreme. Prejudices learned in childhood, ties to friends and family, perceived snubs and wounds from those on the "good" side, those would all be likely motivations. Or there could be genetic brain dysfunctions like insanity (Bellatrix) or sociopathy (Voldemort). How about simply a weak character (Peter, and to a much lesser extent, Lupin)? houyhnhnm: So, while Luna is a very good human being, she is a "bad" Ravenclaw, and so, really, are Flitwick and Cho Chang. What's missing is a "good" Ravenclaw. Maybe we will see one in book 7. I would also like to see a truly good Slytherin in book 7, not one who is merely not on Voldemort's side, but one who uses the qualities that Slytherin prized--ambition, will, resourcefulness, determination--for the betterment of the WW instead of just for personal gain at the cost of its destruction. Julie: Well, I'd like to see a bad Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff who is actually "bad" in the evil sense (Death Eaters, or such). Could be Umbridge is a bad Hufflepuff ;-) As for the good Slytherin who uses his ambition, will, resourcefulness and determination for the betterment of the WW rather than for his own personal gain, I'm certain we'll see one in Book 7. His name will be Severus Snape. Or perhaps you meant two good Slytherins? ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 02:06:16 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 02:06:16 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153105 > Alla: > > That's the thing though - to me > Neville does not show that Draco exaggerates here, although it > certainly can be read that way, I understand, I just don't see the > reason to discard the other possibility. > > Magpie: > But what is the other possibility and why isn't it revealed later? > That Marchbanks is actually best buds with the Malfoys and so fixing > exams? Alla: Not necessarily, NO, just the fact that she was at Malfoys house for dinner. > Magpie: > I don't understand how there are no signs in canon that he got an O > on his test when he's sitting there with his books in Advanced > Potions. Draco's always being cocky in Potions, going along fine in > class as a favorite with Severus "I expect results" Snape--why would > it need special explanation? He's not parting the Red Sea here, he's > just getting a lot of the questions right on a test and mixing a > Potion correctly. Alla: Isn't it the whole point though? That to get an "O" in Snape class is so very hard, that is why he such a good teacher. If it is hard, Draco must be not just good, but outstanding student in Potions and yes, to me that needs foreshadowing, not just him sitting with the book, but him actually doing something very complicated. > Magpie: > No, sorry if I wasn't clear. I think that Draco's being good in > Potions is part of his ongoing relationship with Snape--I think his > relationship with Snape also probably gives him reason to want to do > well in the class. I can't imagine Snape having a favorite who wasn't > performing up to his standard, but I don't think that means Draco is > Snape's favorite because he wowed him in Potions. We know he's > connected to Draco's father, and they seem to also like each other > personally. Alla: Oh, Okay, I am glad that we agree that Snape favors Draco because of his personal connections. The only thing we seem to disagree on is that Snape will not have favorite not performing to his standards. I mean, it is possible of course, I just need the signs. We do see though Snape favoring other Slytherins, not just Draco , no? I doubt that they all are up to Snape standards, personally. > Magpie: > Draco *likes* Snape, so what Harry sees as sucking up does not have > to be that. We never see him manipulating anything out of Snape > through flattery (or anybody managing to do that with Snape!) or even > needing to in class. The OWLS are independent of Snape, and I think > rather than two separate explanations for why he's not really as well > as suggested it's easier to just put the two things together, since > they don't conflict. Alla: But why what is shown as sucking up is not that? What are you basing this on? On the contrary, we see that Draco is sucking up to EVERYBODY, as Neri argued, we see a PATTERN. I mean, to Mcgonagall, to Slughhorn, etc. That is what Draco does. I mean I understand that Draco sucking up to Snape weakens Darco is a good student argument, but we see him doing it on the regular basis to other teachers. Are you just saying that Draco does not really suck up to Snape because of unreliable narrator again? If so, unfortunately I don't find it convincing. Sorry! If Draco did not demonstrate the pattern of such behaviour, that would be a bit different story, IMO. Oh, and we do see Draco trying to flatter Snape in class. Are you saying that this is can be read as something else, not sucking up? "Sir," said Malfoy loudly. "Sir, why don't you apply for Headmaster's job?" "Now, now, Malfoy" said Snape, though he couldn't suppress a thin- lipped smile. "Professor Dumbledore has only been suspended by the governors. I daresay he'll be back with us soon enough>" "Yeah, right," said Malfoy, smirking. "I expect you'd have Father's vote, sir, if you wanted to apply for the job - I'll tell Father you're the best teacher here, sir ---" - CoS, paperback, p.267. > Alla: > And how differently Snape favor would come across if Darco was not a > good student in your opinion? > > Magpie: > Snape would be frustrated and having to excuse Draco's not doing > well. His favoritism would conflict with Draco's performance. Harry > would love it. I don't know if Snape could stand it.:-) Actually, > Snape/Draco seems to sometimes provide a bit of an alternate > Harry/DD. Both men may have set out with an agenda for the boy in > question but wound up relating in unexpected ways once the boy was a > real person in front of them. Alla: Oh, Okay, I understand your reasoning. Thanks. Irene: > I would not go there if I were you. :-) The whole "Snape is a rotten > teacher" theory based largely on the fact that Harry and Neville > performed better when he was not present during the exam. I remember you > and other listees of the similar disposition mentioning this point many > times. Now, the whole "performed better" thing is only meaningful if > OWLs results are impartial and objective. Alla: Your memory is very good. :) But the "Snape is rotten teacher theory" ( or at least my interpretation of it) is based on five years of Snape mistreating Harry and Neville in class, NOT just that they performed much better without him being there. I mean, don't get me wrong, I don't deny that this fact is a very nice support for this argument as I see it, but really, many Snape fans argued the exact opposite BECAUSE of that fact ( although I could never grasp how it works) - that since Snape was not there and Harry and Neville performed better, it means that Snape taught them well. So, what I am trying to say is that the relevance of this fact for Snape as a rotten teacher is really not huge, as I said it is NICE, but say Harry and Neville would not have gotten good results on their OWLS, that would mean to me that Snape mistreating them in class prevented them to do better. See, the fact that they achieved good results without Snape is great, but it works regardless. Anyways, back to Draco's potion skills. Irene: If Marchbanks can be > influenced by bribes and friendly dinners, then this whole argument goes > down the drain, don't you see? Harry and Neville passed their potions > OWL because she likes Harry, and she is friends with Neville's granny, > but they are really as rubbish in Potions as Snape always thought. > See, aren't you better off allowing Malfoy to have his 'O'? :-) Alla: Um, I already agreed upthread that yes, it is unlikely that Marchbank takes bribes, what I don't see as unlikely is Malfoys trying to lure her in, attempting to do so. When Draco is not on the "inside" information, we hear him say so ( as in CoS, about Slytherin Heir), I am sort of inclined to believe him here. I mean, I believe Neville too - that Marchbank never mentions Malfoys. But the original point of this discussion was not even that OWLS were unobjective ( or maybe I got confused again), but that Draco did not get an "O", so I think I am still Okay, if I allow Draco to have his "EE", no? Alla From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 30 03:03:34 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 03:03:34 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153106 > Alla: > But the original point of this discussion was not even that OWLS > were unobjective ( or maybe I got confused again), but that Draco > did not get an "O", so I think I am still Okay, if I allow Draco to > have his "EE", no? > Potioncat: So, out of the 10 students Harry and Ron meet in Potions class, who had an O and what do you base that on?...not just Alla, but anyone who believes Draco did not have an O. It must be presumed that enough students will earn an O, or surely DD would not allow such a high standard. From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 30 03:32:54 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (Magpie) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 23:32:54 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers References: Message-ID: <01ec01c68399$c0ebed80$2b9e400c@Spot> No: HPFGUIDX 153107 > Magpie: >> But what is the other possibility and why isn't it revealed later? >> That Marchbanks is actually best buds with the Malfoys and so > fixing >> exams? > > Alla: > > Not necessarily, NO, just the fact that she was at Malfoys house for > dinner. Magpie: Oh, well there I agree. She may absolutely have been over to their house for dinner. I just don't think this has any effect on Draco's OWL grade. It's not "who you know," it's "what you know." > Alla: > > Isn't it the whole point though? That to get an "O" in Snape class > is so very hard, that is why he such a good teacher. If it is hard, > Draco must be not just good, but outstanding student in Potions and > yes, to me that needs foreshadowing, not just him sitting with the > book, but him actually doing something very complicated. Magpie: I don't think it's as hard to get an O as all that. I understand why people are looking to that number trying to see a reflection of Snape's teaching, which is how this got started, but I don't think every O Snape gets is an amazing thing he's done any more than an amazing thing Malfoy's done in getting an O. Maybe that's the issue. I mean, they're not getting an O in Snape's class, they're getting an O on a standardized test. I think that Snape's class in itself is difficult (Umbridge mentions they're working on advanced stuff), that the kids work at a fairly high level, and maybe that's why I assume Snape always gets plenty of EEs and Os in his class. I don't think Draco and Hermione are the only ones. > Alla: > > Oh, Okay, I am glad that we agree that Snape favors Draco because of > his personal connections. > > The only thing we seem to disagree on is that Snape will not have > favorite not performing to his standards. I mean, it is possible of > course, I just need the signs. > > We do see though Snape favoring other Slytherins, not just Draco , > no? Magpie: He favors Slytherin as a house, siding with them in hallway altercations, getting them time on the Pitch. He favors his house definitely. But I have a hard time imagining that a student he seems to like personally is going to be one of the "dunderheads." Crabbe and Goyle, for instance, are Slytherins, and I think Snape favors them as such, but it doesn't surprise me that they don't seem to share the same kind of relationship with Snape that Draco does. They seem to be judged on their real performance in his class. > Alla: > > But why what is shown as sucking up is not that? What are you basing > this on? > > On the contrary, we see that Draco is sucking up to EVERYBODY, as > Neri argued, we see a PATTERN. Magpie: If you mean that Draco has a pattern of trying to appear to be a good boy and get some teachers to like him sure that's a pattern. I was challenging it in Snape's case because "sucking up" to me implies deceit, that Draco is faking positive feelings for the person he doesn't really have, and in Snape's case I think he genuinely does admire him. I think of Draco and Umbridge as a better example of Draco in true suck up mode--he obviously doesn't really admire Umbridge but gets the IS squad in return--it doesn't help him with his OWL grades that we see. Alla:> > I mean, to Mcgonagall, to Slughhorn, etc. That is what Draco does. I > mean I understand that Draco sucking up to Snape weakens Darco is a > good student argument, but we see him doing it on the regular basis > to other teachers. Magpie: Draco sucking up to Snape doesn't weaken the argument that he's a good student. I only challenged it in Snape's case because, as I said, I think "sucking up" implies a kind of deceit that Draco doesn't feel towards Snape. However, if you're just meaning that Draco tries to behave positively towards teachers in hopes they will favor him in return, yes, he does that. But it doesn't seem to have anything to do with his grades. Umbridge favors him with the IS squad, but I don't think McGonagall, Snape or Slughorn is shown to change his grades because of his personality. In fact that always seemed like one of Malfoy's central problems that everything he's been taught about this kind of stuff is wrong. His father may act like it's the way the world works but Draco's world doesn't work that way. Hermione is a brown-noser who always has to show off in class. I wouldn't be surprised to hear her described as a suck up by some of her classmates but I don't think it affects her grades one way or the other. In fact, Malfoy in CoS tries to claim she's the teacher's favorite, as if this explains her place in the class, but he's wrong. Alla: > Are you just saying that Draco does not really suck up to Snape > because of unreliable narrator again? > If so, unfortunately I don't find it convincing. Sorry! > If Draco did not demonstrate the pattern of such behaviour, that > would be a bit different story, IMO. Magpie: I'm saying that Draco likes Snape and I don't think his behaving positively towards him is artificial. He genuinely admires him, imo. He does not genuinely admire Umbridge, so his behavior towards her reads more like true sucking up. However, I'm also saying that Draco's behavior towards teachers has never been shown to get him grades, particularly on the OWLS, which aren't given by teachers. Alla:> > Oh, and we do see Draco trying to flatter Snape in class. Are you > saying that this is can be read as something else, not sucking up? > > "Sir," said Malfoy loudly. "Sir, why don't you apply for > Headmaster's job?" > "Now, now, Malfoy" said Snape, though he couldn't suppress a thin- > lipped smile. "Professor Dumbledore has only been suspended by the > governors. I daresay he'll be back with us soon enough>" > > "Yeah, right," said Malfoy, smirking. "I expect you'd have Father's > vote, sir, if you wanted to apply for the job - I'll tell Father > you're the best teacher here, sir ---" - CoS, paperback, p.267. Magpie: Heh--I love that scene and Snape's being unable to completely suppress a smile. I think Draco absolutely does think Snape's the best teacher in the school. But what does it have to do with Draco's grades? Because I think he still wound up graded the same as everyone else--and even when he didn't come in first Snape was still his favorite teacher. -m From celizwh at intergate.com Tue May 30 03:32:42 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 03:32:42 -0000 Subject: Good and bad expression of house traits (Was Nice vs. Good) In-Reply-To: <49c.ed696d.31ad0478@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153108 Magpie: > I thought Zach was great.:-) Julie: > I don't think he's the *worst* kind of Hufflepuff. houyhnhnm: Who would have guessed that Zacharias had such a following. :-D I don't really have anything against him. (Honest I don't.) I was just grasping at straws to find an example. (And he seemed like such a safe target.) Julie: > It does make me wonder what would lead a person in each > given house to become a Death Eater? > I think with the Hufflepuffs it could be their trait of > loyalness that would be their downfall. > With Ravenclaws, loyalty to Voldemort would most > likely be ascertained by promises of intellectual > freedom that some might feel is denied > Slytherins obviously would be most driven by their ambition, > A Gryffindor who is recklessly brave, who craves risk, > might well join Voldemort simply for the challenge of > the fight, for the chance to take on the best of the WW, > the Aurors. > Obviously any turn to evil and/or Voldemort's side has > to involve more than just a particular trait taken to an extreme. houyhnhnm: You're right, but I'm a little disappointed that Rowling hasn't developed the house characteristics more than she has. I like your motivations for the DE!Ravenclaws and DE!Hufflepuffs. I hope we'll see one or two characters like that. It would be great if Umbridge turned out to be a Hufflepuff. Julie: Or perhaps you meant two good Slytherins? ;-) houyhnhnm: Yeah , two would be fine, but the one will be good enough. ;-) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 30 03:43:27 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 03:43:27 -0000 Subject: The Veil and The Mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153109 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolinayerbe" wrote: > > Hi! I'm new to the group, so I'm not sure if this has been covered. > > I'd like to know what you all think the nature of The Veil is... what do Lupin and Luna know about it? Why doesn't Harry ask more questions about it? > > Also, what's the nature of the small mirror Sirius gave Harry? Is it going to play an important role in book 7? It must be there for a > reason, what it is? Tonks: Welcome to the group Pepa. As to the Veil. I think it is a portal to the next world, the afterlife. Luna knows that people are there, but if you remember Harry heard the voices too. I think that Luna is sensitive to the spiritual world. She is very insightful and open to possibilities in ways that Muggles and even some wizards are not. Luna, IMO, represents our right brain thinking. As to Lupin, I am not sure how it is that he knows about the Veil, but he knows that those who go behind it are dead. How he knows that I don't have a clue, since the veil is part of experiments at the MoM. He could knows because Tonks and Arthur who work at the MoM may know about it. Or DD may know about it too, and he may have told members of the Order. About the mirror. There is such a thing as a scrying mirror. I hope that isn't what JKR is going to do with it, but I think that it may be where she is going in a very thinly disguised way. A real scrying mirror is used in divination, like a crystal ball, as I understand it. But it can also be used to contact the dead or to go into the astral world. (Its main purpose to to get the scryer in touch with their subconcious through projection.) Frankly I think JKR is in enough trouble with people who think that she is leading kids into real witchcraft, so having Harry use a real scrying mirror would not be a good idea. IMO. Can't remember if the mirror Harry has is black or an ordinary mirror. If I remember correctly, it looked like an ordinary mirror. A scrying mirror is black so you can not see your own reflection. I do think that if we see it again it will be for some sort of communication with Sirius. Hopefully the average HP fan will not 'get' the connection to the real thing. Tonks_op From puduhepa98 at aol.com Tue May 30 03:58:50 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 23:58:50 EDT Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion Message-ID: <3b8.2d9a3b2.31ad1cfa@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153110 >Pippin: We have different definitions. My dictionary says compassion is a *deep* awareness of others' suffering, coupled with the desire to relieve it. It does not take a deep awareness of suffering to notice when someone is dissolving in tears, under the cruciatus curse, kidnapped by a bloodthirsty monster,bleeding to death from multiple wounds or lying in a dementor- induced coma. >Snape doesn't seem to be aware of suffering when it presents itself more subtly, Whether that's because he doesn't care, or because he doesn't easily pick up cues from other people, is hard to say at this point. > Nikkalmati: So a major act of compassion doesn't count because it is too easy? Little acts of compassion are more important? I'm sure you have head the saying "handsome is as handsome does." In my view it applies to Snape. He has to be judged by his actions, not what he says. I think we are discussing here in another guise polite or kind vs. good. Snape does not care for weakness or whining (as he would see it), but he recognizes real need and responds appropriately. IMO this meets the definition of a deep awareness of others suffering and a desire to relieve it. Nikkalmati >>Lanval: > If anyone else, say, Lupin, had brought the Unconscious Four up to > the castle, would you still classify the stretchers as kindness -- > or perhaps as a practical decision (because I would imagine > stretchers from a magical hospital already to be equipped with a > levitating spell of some sort, hence making it much easier to move > along, instead of walking while having to maintain a spell on four > different people.)? Just a thought. Nikkalmati: I don't see the kindness as conjuring a stretcher for Sirius, but as having brought him back to the castle at all. He could have left him there or called the dementors back. Neither of these choices is consistent with Snape's character IMO, At this point Sirius is an escaped murderer to DD and to everyone else who was not aware of the events in the Shack, including Snape. He is unaware of the alternate version of the events after Godric Hollow and he probably blames Sirius for the deaths of James and Lily as well as the 12 Muggles and a deadly threat to Harry. In fact, Snape would have been totally within the law to have killed Sirius on sight. Some listees may say he did not kill him because he wanted to call on the dementors to suck his soul. Well, he didn't do it when he found him lying unconscious by the lake. I think he threatened Sirius in the shack to twist his chain a bit and to gain control of the situation. Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 30 04:08:46 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 04:08:46 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153111 DD said, and we have seen, that the horcruxes are also a weapon. They kill anyone that tries to destroy them. They may also use the life force of the victim to regenerate part of LV as it did in the diary. With this in mind how, I ask you, is Harry going to be able to destroy them? He almost died when he found the first one and we see what happened to DD with the ring. As skilled a wizard as DD is, if it were not for Snape the ring would have killed DD. I just can't see Harry destroying the horcruxes by himself or with his friends. It will be certain death. I have been thinking about who could destroy them. And who `would' destroy them. I think that Slughorn would have the skill, but would not do it. He has too strong of a self preservation streak to take that risk. I can see Mad-Eye doing it, and Snape of course. But we need Snape for something else at the end in the final battle between LV and Harry, so Snape can't do a horcrux too. I expect the person who destroys the horcrux to die doing it. I don't want Tonks and Lupin to die. Maybe another Auror will do it. (have a bit of a self preservation streak myself. ;-) So who will JKR kill off to destroy the horcruxes? I think it would be nice of her if it were someone who was a loner. Someone who would not leave a wife/husband or family behind. And NO not Lupin!! Tonks_op From juli17 at aol.com Tue May 30 05:45:40 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 05:45:40 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153112 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > DD said, and we have seen, that the horcruxes are also a weapon. > They kill anyone that tries to destroy them. They may also use the > life force of the victim to regenerate part of LV as it did in the > diary. With this in mind how, I ask you, is Harry going to be able > to destroy them? He almost died when he found the first one and we > see what happened to DD with the ring. As skilled a wizard as DD > is, if it were not for Snape the ring would have killed DD. I just > can't see Harry destroying the horcruxes by himself or with his > friends. It will be certain death. > > I have been thinking about who could destroy them. And who `would' > destroy them. I think that Slughorn would have the skill, but would > not do it. He has too strong of a self preservation streak to take > that risk. I can see Mad-Eye doing it, and Snape of course. But we > need Snape for something else at the end in the final battle between > LV and Harry, so Snape can't do a horcrux too. I expect the person > who destroys the horcrux to die doing it. Julie: I think Harry will likely destroy a couple of the horcruxes, the real locket horcrux probably, and one or two others. Though the horcruxes do attempt to kill the potential destroyer, Harry may have special protection against their destructive powers that no one else possesses, given that he has a part of Voldemort in him. Still, I don't think he will get them all. If there is a horcrux Harry cannot destroy without dying in the process, I think it will be Nagini. And Nagini, if she is a horcrux, will certainly be the last one destroyed, which means her destruction will probably take place just before or during the final battle. And I've come up with a new theory about who will destroy the final horcrux. (I think it's new, though someone else could have come up with it too I'm sure.) I was reading a HP forum and someone brought up the fact that large cats are often killers of snakes in mythology, especially Egyptian mythology. It was also speculated that Snape's patronus might be a large cat, such as a jaguar or wild cat. It seemed an interesting speculation to me, especially since felines and canines are often mortal enemies (Snape versus Sirius and Lupin). But then I thought of another animal even more famous in literature if not mythology for killing snakes. An animal that in the real world is in fact a renowned snake-killer. Riki Tiki Tavi anyone? JKR said once that she couldn't identify Snape's patronus because it would reveal too much. Some of us thought it might reveal Snape's true loyalty. But what if instead it reveals Snape's ultimate *role* as a snake-killer? (Certainly if she'd told us that Snape's patronus is a mongoose, it would've taken maybe five seconds for most of us to identify what mongooses are famous for, and figure out which snake would be the likely target!) So my theory is that Snape's patronus is a mongoose. And Snape's most direct role in helping bring about Voldemort's downfall will be destroying the Dark Lord's last and perhaps most dangerous horcrux, Nagini the snake, thus clearing a path for Harry to reach Voldemort. And it will be Snape's final role I fear, because mongooses sometimes do die while fighting snakes :( Thoughts? Julie From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue May 30 06:34:58 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 06:34:58 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153113 "Tonks" wrote: > is Harry going to be able to destroy > them? [the horcruxes] Yes. > It will be certain death. Yes, but he'll go out in a blaze of glory, and I can't think of a better way to end the series. > He almost died when he found the first one Yes but Harry did destroy the Horcrux and he did it when he was only twelve, and he received far less injury than Dumbledore did when he destroyed a Horcrux; perhaps this is the reason Dumbledore said he was far less valuable than Harry was. Two down five to go. > who will JKR kill off to destroy the horcruxes? Who do you think? JKR is not going to let some Joe Blow defeat Voldemort, that task will be for the most important character in the series. Eggplant From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue May 30 06:57:40 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 06:57:40 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: <01ec01c68399$c0ebed80$2b9e400c@Spot> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153114 "Magpie" wrote: > I don't think it's as hard to get an O as all that. I disagree, I think getting a O is very hard and quite rare. Even a genius like Hermione couldn't get a O in Defense Against The Dark Arts, only Harry could. Eggplant From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue May 30 09:16:21 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 09:16:21 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153115 > Julie: > I think Harry will likely destroy a couple of the horcruxes, the real > locket horcrux probably, and one or two others. Though the horcruxes > do attempt to kill the potential destroyer, Harry may have special > protection against their destructive powers that no one else > possesses, given that he has a part of Voldemort in him. Brothergib: We have been told previously that Bill is a curse breaker, therefore it seems likely that Harry will bring the Horcruxes to Bill. I don't think Harry would be confident enough to try and destroy a Horcrux himself. Also, IMO, Harry will only deal with one Horcrux. This will probably be the locket, which (as many have previously pointed out) he will find at Grimmauld Place. >But then I thought of another animal even more famous in literature >if not mythology for > killing snakes. An animal that in the real world is in fact a > renowned snake-killer. Riki Tiki Tavi anyone? > > JKR said once that she couldn't identify Snape's patronus because it > would reveal too much. Some of us thought it might reveal Snape's > true loyalty. But what if instead it reveals Snape's ultimate *role* as a snake-killer? (Certainly if she'd told us that Snape's patronus is a mongoose, it would've taken maybe five seconds for most > of us to identify what mongooses are famous for, and figure out >which snake would be the likely target!) Brothergib: Interesting as well that from Snape's own mouth we hear that a wizard's Patronus can change according to how that wizard is feeling (when Snape derides Tonks change in Patronus in HBP). If Snape's Patronus is a mongoose, I don't think it would have started out that way. If (as many of us believe) Snape has a deep seated lothing of Voldemort, then his patronus may very well have changed to some snake killing animal. > > So my theory is that Snape's patronus is a mongoose. And Snape's most direct role in helping bring about Voldemort's downfall will be > destroying the Dark Lord's last and perhaps most dangerous horcrux, > Nagini the snake, thus clearing a path for Harry to reach Voldemort. > And it will be Snape's final role I fear, because mongooses sometimes do die while fighting snakes :( > > Thoughts? > > Julie > I think that Snape will actually destroy all the remaining Horcruxes except one - the locket as discussed above. We do not know where (or in some cases what!) the remaining Horcruxes are, and must assume that if DD knew, he would have told Harry. Therefore, to find the remaining Horcruxes you need to ask Voldemort himself. My thoughts are that Snape will now approach Voldemort and claim that DD knew of the Horcruxes and may have told HP where they are. Voldemort (who now trusts Snape implicitly) will give Snape the role of protecting his Horcruxes. We have canon evidence that noone knows more about the Dark Arts than Snape, so who better to destroy Horcruxes. Finally, I do not think we will witness the destruction of these Horcruxes. I think that as Harry and Voldemort come face to face for the last time, Snape will have the satisfaction of telling Voldemort that all his Horcruxes are gone!! And I agree with you - Snape won't survive! Brothergib From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue May 30 09:12:16 2006 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 02:12:16 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <288453373.20060530021216@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153116 Monday, May 29, 2006, 9:08:46 PM, Tonks wrote: T> So who will JKR kill off to destroy the horcruxes? I think it would T> be nice of her if it were someone who was a loner. Someone who would T> not leave a wife/husband or family behind. And NO not Lupin!! A few potential candidates who come to my mind: Mad-Eye Moody Aberforth Dumbledore Kingsley Shacklebolt Daedalus Diggle (I'm still rooting for him to become important!) Hestia Jones Viktor Krum RAB (*whoever* he is!) -- Dave From jenniferkchoi at gmail.com Tue May 30 10:28:31 2006 From: jenniferkchoi at gmail.com (Jennifer Choi) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 03:28:31 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: References: <01ec01c68399$c0ebed80$2b9e400c@Spot> Message-ID: <9d4afd760605300328k7e21fdc8ha8e70bb17847bd51@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153117 Magpie wrote: > > I don't think it's as hard to get an O as all that. > Eggplant responded: > I disagree, I think getting a O is very hard and quite rare. Even a > genius like Hermione couldn't get a O in Defense Against The Dark > Arts, only Harry could. This was mentioned a few posts up, but if it was that hard to get an O I don't think that DD would allow Snape to use this as the entrance grade into advanced potions: which is required for both Auror and Healer training. If that were the case then based on the idea that only one or two kids get an O each year, there would only be say one new healer and one new aurorer each year; and although we have no exact number of how many aurors or healers there are in the WW there is no mention in the books of a drastic shortage of either - which would seem to be pertinent to the storyline since the entire plot is centered around two periods of social turmoil where both professions are particularly involved. If nothing else after the Voldwar I one would think that, if only 1 or 2 students were getting into advanced potions each year, DD would have forced Snape to lower the requirements so that there were more students eligible to be aurors. Therefore, in my mind getting an O is likely something more along the lines of getting say a >A in a class at university - difficult, but every class that I have ever been in has at least 10-20% of the class getting one, which would translate to 2-4 students give or take from each potions section. Also I find it curious that there is a huge push to discredit Draco's mark, unless there is direct evidence supporting the grades of everyone else in Advanced Potions I don't see why he can't have an O unless explicitly stated. "Jennifer" From ceridwennight at hotmail.com Tue May 30 11:06:15 2006 From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 11:06:15 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153118 Eggplant: > I disagree, I think getting a O is very hard and quite rare. Even a > genius like Hermione couldn't get a O in Defense Against The Dark > Arts, only Harry could. Ceridwen: Defense Against the Dark Arts has been taught poorly for years, due to two things: changing teachers every year, and some of the teachers we've seen, like Lockhart, aren't worth the time the students spend in class. Harry has a deep interest in DADA. He's got LV after him, so he'll need it, and I think he would have had an interest anyway, though maybe not as much of one. On the other hand, Snape has been teaching Potions for fourteen years at this point, so knows there is consistency in the teaching. Also, he has been teaching above level according to OotP, so his students getting higher marks in their O.W.L.s would make more sense, since they are comfortable with the slightly lower, more age-appropriate standardized exams. Ceridwen. From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 07:27:34 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 07:27:34 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: <3b8.2d9a3b2.31ad1cfa@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153119 > >Pippin: > We have different definitions. My dictionary says compassion is a *deep* > awareness of others' suffering, coupled with the desire to relieve it. It > does > not take a deep awareness of suffering to notice when someone is > dissolving in tears, under the cruciatus curse, kidnapped by a bloodthirsty > monster,bleeding to death from multiple wounds or lying in a dementor- > induced coma. Lanval: I agree, completely. And in a case like Draco bleeding to death, Snape's healing is hardly compassionate. Refusing aid to a critically injured or endangered person is not unkind, nor does it show a lack of compassion, it's a CRIME. > Nikkalmati: > > So a major act of compassion doesn't count because it is too easy? Little > acts of compassion are more important? I'm sure you have head the saying > "handsome is as handsome does." In my view it applies to Snape. He has to be > judged by his actions, not what he says. I think we are discussing here in > another guise polite or kind vs. good. Snape does not care for weakness or > whining (as he would see it), but he recognizes real need and responds > appropriately. IMO this meets the definition of a deep awareness of others suffering > and a desire to relieve it. Lanval: Yes, he was really eager to fix Hermione's teeth.... What a whiner she is, too. Can't even take a friendly joke, that girl. > Nikkalmati: > I don't see the kindness as conjuring a stretcher for Sirius, but as having > brought him back to the castle at all. He could have left him there or > called the dementors back. Neither of these choices is consistent with Snape's > character IMO, At this point Sirius is an escaped murderer to DD and to > everyone else who was not aware of the events in the Shack, including Snape. He is > unaware of the alternate version of the events after Godric Hollow and he > probably blames Sirius for the deaths of James and Lily as well as the 12 > Muggles and a deadly threat to Harry. Lanval: Snape HATED James. And don't you think it would be a bit rich for Snape to blame Sirius for the Potter's death, when it was Snape himself (surely he can't have forgotten?) who took the prophesy to Voldemort?? Voldemort killed the Potters. NOT Sirius. NOT Snape. But if Snape wants to blame Sirius, he has to blame himself, too. Btw, how do you (and others who believe that Snape lives by the code of Must-Keep-Harry-Safe) deal with the fact that both in CoS and PoA he tries to have Harry expelled? How's that for the future of the WW, to kick the Chosen One out into the world without a magical education? In fact, Snape would have been totally > within the law to have killed Sirius on sight. Lanval: Where does it say that? I found my copy again and have been looking through it, yet I haven't been able to find where Open Season is declared on Sirius. People are warned, and are told to keep an eye open and remain calm, and inform the Ministry if they spot him. Where does it say that any Wizard or Witch has the right to cast an Unforgivable Curse? To kill Sirius on sight, even if he is unarmed and cornered, or prepared to come quietly (as he was in the Shack)? Nikkalmati: Some listees may say he did not > kill him because he wanted to call on the dementors to suck his soul. Well, > he didn't do it when he found him lying unconscious by the lake. I think he > threatened Sirius in the shack to twist his chain a bit and to gain control of > the situation. > Lanval: Certainly. I don't think he meant to take Sirius and Lupin straight to the dementors. He needed to do it legally. And he knew that once he brought him back to the castle to hand him over to Fudge, the dementors would be called. Scholastic Hb Ed, p.416: "'...only hope Dumbledore's not going to make difficulties,' Snape was saying. 'The Kiss will be performed immediately?'" Nice. From empress.najwa at gmail.com Tue May 30 11:11:30 2006 From: empress.najwa at gmail.com (Najwa) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 11:11:30 -0000 Subject: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153120 > > Carodave wrote: > > Didn't Kreacher take the locket back to his nest when he 'saved' some > of the items? I think that Kreacher will be instrumental in finding > and destroying this particular horcrux, whether or not he wants to... > Najwa: I think Kreacher should come along with the trio. Harry inherited Kreacher, so I feel that Kreacher could be useful in tracking horcruxes, considering he knows a few dark wizards. Even though Kreacher is loyal to Bellatrix and other death eaters, he still must do what Harry says.So if Harry words his words correctly, he could get Kreacher to find not only the locket, but in finding all of the rest in general, though I highly doubt she'll write it out like that. She might just do the locket thing though. Najwa ____________________________ From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 11:56:41 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 11:56:41 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153121 > Lanval: > Btw, how do you (and others who believe that Snape lives by the code > of Must-Keep-Harry-Safe) deal with the fact that both in CoS and PoA > he tries to have Harry expelled? How's that for the future of the > WW, to kick the Chosen One out into the world without a magical > education? Alla: Hehe. I know the answer. Don't you get it, he was just pretending. You know, messing with Harry's mind. He does not really want him expelled. He just complains to DD all the time. :) > Lanval: > Certainly. I don't think he meant to take Sirius and Lupin straight > to the dementors. He needed to do it legally. And he knew that once > he brought him back to the castle to hand him over to Fudge, the > dementors would be called. > > Scholastic Hb Ed, p.416: > > "'...only hope Dumbledore's not going to make difficulties,' Snape > was saying. 'The Kiss will be performed immediately?'" > > Nice. > Alla: Yes, and in light of what you said in part that I snipped ( I also don't remember open season on Sirius). Let's go into speculation land: IF Snape killed SIrius on site, unless he had a permission from the ministry, Wizengamot would have opened investigation about the use of Unforgivable, since people do go to Azkaban for using those. And the only time I remember those being authorized were by Crouch Sr. to aurors. Am I missing something? Now, Snape would have of course pleaded a self-defense or a defense of killing dangerous criminal, but I certainly doubt that he wanted to risk any kind of investigation AT ALL. Because,you know, his wand would have been checked, no? Who knows which curses were performed with it? I totally think that Snape would have much preferred Sirius to be killed legally, but also don't think that it shows Snape kindness ar all. Alla. From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Tue May 30 13:57:19 2006 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 13:57:19 -0000 Subject: Minerva McGonagall Speculation In-Reply-To: <2dc31dfffa0f448e2eac1ab770493e8d@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153122 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barb Roberts wrote: > > Recently, we had a few threads on ESE | Minerva. (Not that I can find > them again--so many posts to wade through). This is an idea that I just > don't see. Not that it's not interesting to speculate; however, I see > Dumbledore trusting Minerva with his most the thing that may be most > important to him--Hogwarts. So important is Hogwarts that he doesn't > want her getting sidetracked with other things. I think she would find > it difficult to not take over the Horcrux problem if she knew about it. > I don't think it's lack of trust on Dumbledore's part that has him > keeping MM separate from some of the activities, but rather DD method > of keeping MM focused and securing the future of the school. > > I have another thought, possibly as wild a theory, concerning Minerva > though. It however hinges on the theory that Dumbledore is not dead. > If Dumbledore is, in some way still present, it will be Minerva who > discovers it. Why? It's her initials "MM." it's the same initials as > Mary Magdalene. And since McGonagall is at Hogwarts and has access to > DD's office, if DD is around in anyway, I think she will be the one who > makes this discovery. > > > Barbara > (Ivogun) ~aussie~ But How is Prof McGonagall with Dark Arts (needed for Horcrux hunting) and Occlemacy (so LV wouldn't find out DD's discovery of LV's weak spot)? She is very honest (giving points off her own house Gryffindor), a reknown Animagi (registered too) and better at cleaning up the Twins farewell present to Umbridge than the DADA teacher then. But her fighting skills were only viewed when Umbridge went after Hagrid and in the hallway after DD got AKed. Neither time were her spells or hexes all that remarkable. As we used to say when I was a student, "If teachers are so smart, how come they are still oging to school?" (ie, She is a better teacher than Aurour Aussie From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Tue May 30 14:24:18 2006 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 14:24:18 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory In-Reply-To: <20060529124259.23336.qmail@web36804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153123 --- AnitaKH wrote: > > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 17, A Sluggish Memory > ... > Dumbledore presses on, having one more memory to explore that evening. He produces another phial, ... Landing in the memory, Harry instantly recognizes a much younger Slughorn, ... Harry sees Tom Riddle among the students gathered, and he notices Tom was wearing the Gaunt ring. ... > > ... Just as ... the party was breaking up. Tom lagged behind to ask Slughorn about Horcruxes. Again, the fog descends and Harry hears Slughorn speak through the fog, denying any knowledge of Horcruxes and ordering Tom out of the room. ~aussie~ Times change. Laws change. (eg, in GOF, flying carpets were legal before but illegal now) So if Tom has the ring at this age, where did he learn the Unforgiveable curse from? Was it part of school study schedule then as it still may be in Durmstrang now? It could have been taught the same way Barty Couch Jr / Mad Eye Moody impersonator did. The MOM may have passed a law since Tom's time making then Unforgivable instead of just Dark Curses. Or would Nocturn Alley have books on "Unforgivable Curses: 101" and "The Idiot's Guide to Horcrux" After all, he didn't want DD with him when he first explored Diagon Alley to buy his school books. Aussie From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 30 14:35:17 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 14:35:17 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills WAS: Scary Teachers - Good Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > > "Magpie" wrote: > > > I don't think it's as hard to get an O as all that. > > I disagree, I think getting a O is very hard and quite rare. Even a > genius like Hermione couldn't get a O in Defense Against The Dark > Arts, only Harry could. Magpie: Whatever Hermione's problems in DADA (Bad teachers? Inconsist teaching? Less natural talent?) she gets ten O's in her other classes doesn't she? We're told Snape only accepts O's in his Potions NEWT class, so I think kids getting O's is a regular occurrance. It's a test on a subject the kids have been studying for five years. If it's impossible to get Outstanding it would suggest the test was completely inappropriate to their course of study. Everyone should theoretically be able to get an O on all their OWLS. -m From enlil65 at gmail.com Tue May 30 14:41:51 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 09:41:51 -0500 Subject: Snape's Patronus (was: Horcrux hunting) Message-ID: <1789c2360605300741v10e6e3c5kc0fe7d01be8d981f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153125 On 5/30/06, juli17ptf wrote: Julie: > JKR said once that she couldn't identify Snape's patronus because it > would reveal too much. Some of us thought it might reveal Snape's > true loyalty. But what if instead it reveals Snape's ultimate *role* > as a snake-killer? (Certainly if she'd told us that Snape's patronus > is a mongoose, it would've taken maybe five seconds for most of us to > identify what mongooses are famous for, and figure out which snake > would be the likely target!) Peggy W: Probably this has been guessed before, but I think it is interesting that as Cissa and Bella approach Spinners End they see a fox. Bella kills it thinking it might be an Auror, but she was mistaken... an interesting thought that Snape's Patronus could be a fox. It seems to fit. It certainly fits the Slytherin characteristics. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 14:40:33 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 14:40:33 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153126 > Lanval: > Certainly. I don't think he meant to take Sirius and Lupin straight > to the dementors. He needed to do it legally. And he knew that once > he brought him back to the castle to hand him over to Fudge, the > dementors would be called. > > Scholastic Hb Ed, p.416: > > "'...only hope Dumbledore's not going to make difficulties,' Snape > was saying. 'The Kiss will be performed immediately?'" > > Nice. Leslie41: Nope. Not "nice". Snape did what he was supposed to do. You are still illogically hanging on to the unsupportable idea that Snape should have on his own recognizance and quite illegally FREED Sirius Black, which was, again, something that EVEN DUMBLEDORE would not do. Look how Dumbledore does not EVER get directly involved with the freeing of Sirius Black. Does not attempt to defend him to the minister. Does not use the time turner himself. You know, it occurs to me that if Dumbledore really wanted to see to it that Sirius Black was freed, he would have tended to things himself instead of sending to adolescents into a dangerous situation to do it. Why didn't he? He doesn't because like Snape he is following the rules and doing what he is supposed to do. And what he is "supposed" to do does not include freeing the Wizarding World's equivalent of Charlie Manson. Now if you want to say that Snape was looking forward to Sirius getting a kiss from the dementor, it would be hard to disagree with that. But who can blame him, considering? Sirius Black is is sworn enemy, who from Snape's perspective, tried to murder *him* and isn't sorry. Throughout the entire episode there is nothing you can fault as to his actions. From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 14:58:32 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 14:58:32 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153127 > > Lanval: > > > > Btw, how do you (and others who believe that Snape lives by the > > code of Must-Keep-Harry-Safe) deal with the fact that both in > > CoS and PoA he tries to have Harry expelled? How's that for the > > future of the WW, to kick the Chosen One out into the world > > without a magical education? > Leslie41: Well, you're putting words in Snape's mouth. I can't recall anywhere that Snape himself admits that Harry is "the Chosen One". That's what a lot of people believe, but personally I don't think Snape does, in part because I can't see him believing that Trelawney is capable of a decent prophecy. As a legilimens I would guess that he thinks divination is a bunch of drivel, especially since Trelawney is a kook. I can't say for sure, of course, because there's no evidence in canon (that I remember) that he says Harry ISN'T "the Chosen One". But I don't think there's evidence that Snape thinks he is. Could be very wrong on this, but I don't think so. I think that Snape thinks the ballyhoo about Harry is all ill-founded and a bunch of hogwash. And, of course, he doesn't *want* to believe it. As for trying to get Harry expelled...come on, according to the "rules" Harry should have been expelled for the stuff he did. Snape sees Harry as a boy who doesn't think the rules apply to him, and Snape is right. > Alla: > > Hehe. I know the answer. Don't you get it, he was just pretending. > You know, messing with Harry's mind. He does not really want him > expelled. He just complains to DD all the time. :) > Leslie41: Oh, he definitely wants Harry expelled. I'm with you on that. > Alla: > Let's go into speculation land: IF Snape killed SIrius on site, > unless he had a permission from the ministry, Wizengamot would > have opened investigation about the use of Unforgivable, since > people do go to Azkaban for using those. And the only time I > remember those being authorized were by Crouch Sr. to aurors. Leslie41: Of course the incident would have been investigated. Just as the police would come and question me if I shot a "murderer" as well. But you know what? I would be hailed as a "hero" for doing do. Far more of a hero than if I had merely subdued the murderer and brought him into custody. Truthfully, Snape had *everything to gain* by killing Sirius on sight. He doesn't. Do you doubt that he wants to? That he wants to very very much? "Give me a reason," he says. Snape's itching to kill Black. But deep down he knows that this isn't the way things should be done. > Alla: > Am I missing something? Now, Snape would have of course pleaded a > self-defense or a defense of killing dangerous criminal, but I > certainly doubt that he wanted to risk any kind of investigation > AT ALL. Leslie41: Yup. That's logical. Because Snape's a known coward who never, ever does anything "risky." From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Tue May 30 15:15:16 2006 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 15:15:16 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills. In-Reply-To: <9d4afd760605300328k7e21fdc8ha8e70bb17847bd51@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153128 "Jennifer Choi" wrote: > based on the idea that only one or two kids get an O > each year, there would only be say one new healer > and one new aurorer each year; And McGonagall told Harry that it had been several years since anyone was picked for auroer training; they only take the best of the best. sistermagpie wrote: > Whatever Hermione's problems in DADA >(Bad teachers? Inconsistteaching? Less natural talent?) > she gets ten O's in her other classes doesn't she? That's why I called Hermione a genius. > if it's impossible to get Outstanding [ ] It's not impossible, just very very difficult. > Everyone should theoretically be able to > get an O on all their OWLS. If everybody can get a O in everything then what grade do you give a genius? Eggplant Eggplant From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue May 30 15:24:22 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 15:24:22 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153129 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > JKR said once that she couldn't identify Snape's patronus because it would reveal too much. Some of us thought it might reveal Snape's > true loyalty. But what if instead it reveals Snape's ultimate *role* as a snake-killer? (Certainly if she'd told us that Snape's patronus is a mongoose, it would've taken maybe five seconds for most of us to identify what mongooses are famous for, and figure out which snake would be the likely target!) > > So my theory is that Snape's patronus is a mongoose. And Snape's most direct role in helping bring about Voldemort's downfall will be destroying the Dark Lord's last and perhaps most dangerous horcrux, Nagini the snake, thus clearing a path for Harry to reach Voldemort. Tonks: I looked up 'mongoose' because (hate to admit it to everyone), I didn't know what it was. I have heard the word, but that is all. Apparently we do not have them in the U.S. I found a picture of one and it does look kind of Snapey. http://encarta.msn.com/media_461542878_761574651_- 1_1/Egyptian_Mongoose.html I do like your idea and it makes sense. (I don't suppose that it would every be a 'lap dog'.) As you or someone else said it may have changed after Snape switched sides. But how could he keep it from LV? Is it ONLY the Order that uses the patronis? Seems like I remember something like that. Yes, I really do like this idea. Can't you just see it all happening? Tonks_op From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 30 15:45:56 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 11:45:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060530154556.25887.qmail@web37213.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153130 Tonks wrote: DD said, and we have seen, that the horcruxes are also a weapon. They kill anyone that tries to destroy them. They may also use the life force of the victim to regenerate part of LV as it did in the diary. With this in mind how, I ask you, is Harry going to be able to destroy them? He almost died when he found the first one and we see what happened to DD with the ring. Catherine now: Well, I actually have more faith in Harry. It wasn't the Diary that almost killed him, it was the Basilisk's venemous fang imbedded in his arm that almost killed him. 12-year-old, smailler-than-average Harry managed to kill a 20-foot long snake with an adult-sized sword, that he had never learn to use properly. If you're looking for a snake-killer, I think Harry wins hands-down. I think Nagani would be easier than the Basilisk, given Harry's age and experience now. Catherine --------------------------------- Make free worldwide PC-to-PC calls. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger with Voice [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 30 15:47:37 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 15:47:37 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153131 > Tonks: > I looked up 'mongoose' snip > I do like your idea and it makes sense. Potioncat: I remember a thread about HP characters as Jungle Book character. (Is Snape more like Baghera or Baloo?) but I don't recall his ever being comared to Riki Tiki Tavi before. :-) Tonks: As you or someone else said it may have changed > after Snape switched sides. But how could he keep it from LV? Is it > ONLY the Order that uses the patronis? Seems like I remember something > like that. Potioncat: Many wizards can cast a Patronus. Only the Order uses them for communication. Snape apparantly doesn't use them against Dementors. So perhaps he could conceal his Patronus from the DEs. Of course, it's still a theory that his Patronus will change. If it does, I'm not sure how we'll know... From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Tue May 30 16:11:14 2006 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 16:11:14 -0000 Subject: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? In-Reply-To: <3b9.2d6ea12.31acfc44@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153132 > bboyminn at ... writes: > like the And they won't find it. They will assume that it was thrown out > or that Mundungus nipped it. Finally it will be located in > Kreacher 'room'. Just guesses on my part, but that's the way > I would write it. Amiable Dorsai: Too easy. If I were writng it, Kreacher would have given the locket to Narcissa Malfoy. Narcissa would hold the locket hostage for Draco's life, after Draco's failure to kill Dumbledore. Then Narcissa, at least, would go to the Order for sanctuary, again using the locket as a bargaining chip. Then it would get complicated. Amiable "maybe I will write it" Dorsai From belviso at attglobal.net Tue May 30 16:18:12 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 16:18:12 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153133 > sistermagpie wrote: > > > Whatever Hermione's problems in DADA > >(Bad teachers? Inconsistteaching? Less natural talent?) > > she gets ten O's in her other classes doesn't she? > > That's why I called Hermione a genius. Magpie: So you think straight-A students are all geniuses? They're really not. Eggplant: > > > if it's impossible to get Outstanding [ ] > > It's not impossible, just very very difficult. > > > Everyone should theoretically be able to > > get an O on all their OWLS. > > If everybody can get a O in everything then what grade do you give a > genius? Magpie: Hermione doesn't get O's because she's a genius. She gets O's because she understands and knows the material she memorizes in class and gets it right when it comes time to take the test (in this school genius doesn't even always come into it anyway). The marks are based on how well you perform on the material you've studied. Everyone in class can theoretically get an O in everything. They've been given the information and been taught what to do. Each year some students both retain the information they've learned, answer questions, write an essay or perform the skills they've learned well enough to get an O. Snape only even agrees to continue with students unless they get O's in Potions, and most of Slughorn's class appears to meet this requirement, just as a classful of kids would every year. -m From distaiyi at yahoo.com Tue May 30 17:26:38 2006 From: distaiyi at yahoo.com (distaiyi) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 17:26:38 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153134 So who's going to destroy the Horcruxes? Given that a portion of Voldemort's soul is in each object I can't see anyone destroying one without him having some knowledge of the event. Using that as (while a pleasant thing to think about) device at the end of the books would seem contrived... let me know when you can cut off finger without knowing about it and then maybe I'll buy that part of your soul can be destroyed without you knowing about it. I do like the speculation of Snape as a Mongoose Patronus weilding traitor to the dark lord. However, what seems to be forgotten is "Dumbledor's Army" which is actually Harry's Army. The DA is essentially Harry's Order of the Phoenix. And given that they've now fought DE's once and most of them survived I think they will be doing whatever is necessary to prepare for the next fight. I can't discount them being involved every step whether Harry wants them to or not. I still have my pet theory that Harry and Voldemort will battle and Harry will die, but Volde will be very much weakened. At which point Neville, who secretly followed Harry will finish off the Dark Lord for Harry and his parents. I think JKR's thrown us a red herring with her dismissal of Neville as the ultimate hero here :) From littleleah at handbag.com Tue May 30 17:28:40 2006 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 17:28:40 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153135 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" wrote: >> > Eggplant: > > If everybody can get a O in everything then what grade do you give a genius? > > Magpie: > Hermione doesn't get O's because she's a genius. She gets O's > because she understands and knows the material she memorizes in > class and gets it right when it comes time to take the test (in this > school genius doesn't even always come into it anyway).> -m Leah: And quite ofen, a person with a truly new insight into a subject, doesn't shine that much academically, because they don't follow the rules that Magpie sets out above. Einstein's headmaster said Einstein wasn't university material, that's why he ended up in the patent office. If Snape had written 'stick a bezoar down their throat' in a potions NEWT, I don't think he would have got an O, because that innate grasp the subject wasn't what he was being asked to demonstrate. We don't know if Snape is at genius level at potions, but the Prince's annotations show that sort of flair. Hermione's class work shows someone who is going to work at getting the top grade. Harry got marks in DADA for demonstrating a corporeal patronus; he didn't get that out of classes. Leah From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue May 30 17:35:16 2006 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 17:35:16 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153136 > Magpie: > Hermione doesn't get O's because she's a genius. She gets O's > because she understands and knows the material she memorizes in > class and gets it right when it comes time to take the test (in this > school genius doesn't even always come into it anyway). Potioncat: That's right. A genius would get Os, but so would a bunch of bright and/or hardworking students. Some would get the O easily, others would have a more difficult time of it. (a bunch = vague number of students.)But in the end the score would be the score. Back to Draco I went to CoS to look at the interaction between Lucius and Draco about grades. At first, the way Lucius words it, it seems Draco's grades are not good. (Still, this is vague.)Then it quickly becomes "you let a girl of no wizarding family out score you in every test." If Draco's marks were "bad" would he be compared to Hermione? It almost sounds as if his marks are very close to hers. Or Lucius might say, you let all those Mudbloods out score you!" Like it or not, I think Draco earned an O in Potions. From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 14:57:23 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 14:57:23 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153137 > > houyhnhnm: > > I do not look at niceness with contempt. My problem with Lupin has > nothing to do with his niceness. He was my favorite character from > the time he was intoduced in PoA up until the pensieve scene in OotP. > I glossed right over his unprofessionable behavior toward Snape, his > failure to come clean with Dumbledore, his recklessness in rushing out > without taking his potion, his willingness to participate in a summary > execution, even the recounting of his behavior as a Marauder when he > was supposed to have been staying in the Shrieking Shack during his > transformations for the protection of Hogwarts. > Lanval: His 'unprofessional behavior' with Snape? Are you referring to the Boggart scene? If so, all I have to say is this: if Snape hadn't been overcome by utter disgust upon merely seeing Lupin & class entering the staff room, and had refrained from making a gratuitously nasty remark about Neville, I doubt Lupin would have picked Neville as his first example on how to fight a boggart. And how would Lupin know that Neville's worst fear would turn out to be Snape? Once Neville revealed this, there wasn't much Lupin could have done. The way to fight a boggart is to render it ridiculous, to laugh at it. Lupin didn't invent that particular defense. Nor did he spread the story all about the school. In other words, Snape's own nastiness came right back to bite him in the butt. > I could not overlook his failure to step in, when he was a *prefect*, > and his friends were tormenting another student just because "he > exists". My attitute toward Lupin and Snape, whom I had previously > loved to hate, began to change at that time. I re-read PoA and I > began to see Lupin's behavior in a very different light. Lanval: So you think it's fair to judge a person's character by something he did, or rather failed to do, at the age of fifteen? > As a child werewolf, Lupin had no hope of attending school. > Dumbledore made it possible for him to do so; he even made him a > prefect. Lupin repaid Dumbledore by abdicating his responsibility as > a prefect and running loose as a werewolf with his three friends, > thereby putting the whole community at risk. > > As an adult werewolf, Lupin had no hope of gainful employment. Again > Dumbledore gave him a chance, and again Lupin betrayed Dumbledore's > trust. These are serious transgressions. Yes, Lupin felt bad about > what he was doing or failing to do, but the bad feelings *never > changed his behavior*. He gave DD notice, thus accepting resposibility for his failure. Where in the next three books has he continued any kind of untrustworthy behavior? He takes on what appear to be extremely dangerous assignments (as a spy, which sounds every bit as perilous as what Snape is doing. Perhaps more so, since he spends much more time close to the enemy than Snape does. Then there's Fenrir Greyback. Enough said.). He pushes Tonks away, to a large part because he fears he's too dangerous. Seems as if he's become very, very careful about putting others at risk. DD, I might add, doesn't consider Lupin a lost cause. He in fact continues to trust in him. We also don't hear about any transgressions during the post-Hogwarts years, up to his return as a teacher. Considering that he had no wolfsbane, he must have done well when it came taking the necessary precautions. > Snape's transgressions are worse. I grant that. Even if he never > participated in an act of murder or torture, if he slithered out of > action every time, whatever he did do may have enabled the murdering > and torturing, and just by joining the Death Eaters, IMO, he shares > responsibility for whatever acts they committed. > > The difference is that when Snape realized what he was doing was > wrong, *he changed his ways* [I know some people don't think so, but > for me it is a settled question. I'm not going to argue DDM vs ESE! > Snape anymore]. And he did so with very little prospect of ever being > rewarded. Lanval: And for me it's anything but a settled question, so we'll just have to leave it at that... > What keeps people nice or good most of the time? Are we not nice > partly because we want others to be nice to us? Are we not good > because we want our family and our friends to think well of us rather > than ill? Isn't it a kind of social inertia that keeps most people on > the straight and narrow? Lanval: Do tell me where the human race would be without this "social behavior"... It's bad enough as it is. Try to imagine a world full of Snapes. > Lupin wants to be liked so badly he is willing to compromise his > values and commit acts he knows are wrong. Snape, who had cut all > ties to the law-abiding WW, wrenched himself from his headlong fall > into evil and set himself back on the right path because, when brought > face-to-face with what he had become, he rejected evil and chose good > for its own sake alone. He will never be liked by those he has rejoined. > > Your hypothetical character B may be better than character A, but > neither is a very good match with any actual character in the Harry > Potter books. Too much has been left out. > Lanval: Well, I could argue the same for your characterization of Snape, since you won't allow for any interpretation but the one you consider cut in stone. But hey, it's been an interesting discussion. Personally I don't care whether Snape lives, dies, is turned into the Giant Squid's new best friend, is revealed as one of the most interesting villains in modern literature, or turns out to have been DDM all along. As long as it's explained well, I'll live with it. Snape's not the story for me. Not by a long shot. I do have a feeling, though, that nothing we've seen from Fandom thus far will compare to what will ensue once Book 7 is released. *stocks up on popcorn and candy, and settles in for the wait* From Jen at alveymedia.com Tue May 30 14:51:17 2006 From: Jen at alveymedia.com (Jennifer Nielsen) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 08:51:17 -0600 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153138 Tonks_op: > > So who will JKR kill off to destroy the horcruxes? I think it would > be nice of her if it were someone who was a loner. Someone who would > not leave a wife/husband or family behind. And NO not Lupin!! > > I've been following an interesting fan fic in Fiction Alley (HP and the War of Souls by Weffie1) that speculates (as Juli17ptf wrote) the reason Harry could destroy the diary with no personal harm coming to him is because there is a bit of Voldemort in him. Dumbledore destroyed the ring but at great personal cost. The fan fic suggests the horcrux soul "recognizes" its master inside Harry and thus does not fight back in the same way. Personally I think while others may help Harry acquire the horcruxes, he'll be the one to destroy them. This is Harry's journey. I think it will remain that way with the horcruxes. Jen From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 19:09:42 2006 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:09:42 -0000 Subject: The Bloody Baron In-Reply-To: <006401c68285$60a25370$6501a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153139 Kim wrote: The ghosts still fascinate me, especially the Bloody Baron. Doesn't he look a bit like Snape? Of course, if they're related that blows my theory that he's Slytherin since Snape wasn't the heir. So who are these ghosts? Surely they'll come up somehow before it's over. I'd love to think that they are more than window dressing for the books. Scholastic US Paperback, page 124: Harry looked over at the Sytherin table and saw a horrible ghost sitting there, with blank staring eyes, a gaunt face, and robes stained with silver blood. Janelle: I read this and my eye immediately stuck on the word "gaunt", as in "The House of Gaunt". Any possibility that JKR is giving us a clue and that the bloody baron has some relation here? This fits with Kim's idea about the possibility of the Baron being Salazar Slytherin himself as the Slytherin family became the Gaunt family. I really wish I wasn't at work and could get out my book 6 and double check my information, and try to find more, something about silver blood maybe! An interesting side note, I decided to look up the word gaunt and one of the definitions was "Bleak and desolate; barren", drawing another connection to the Bloody Baron. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 19:20:49 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:20:49 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153140 Brothergib wrote: > > We have been told previously that Bill is a curse breaker, therefore > it seems likely that Harry will bring the Horcruxes to Bill. I don't > think Harry would be confident enough to try and destroy a Horcrux > himself. Also, IMO, Harry will only deal with one Horcrux. This will > probably be the locket, which (as many have previously pointed out) > he will find at Grimmauld Place. > Interesting as well that from Snape's own mouth we hear that a > wizard's Patronus can change according to how that wizard is feeling > (when Snape derides Tonks change in Patronus in HBP). If Snape's > Patronus is a mongoose, I don't think it would have started out that > way. If (as many of us believe) Snape has a deep seated lothing of > Voldemort, then his patronus may very well have changed to some snake killing animal. > I think that Snape will actually destroy all the remaining Horcruxes > except one - the locket as discussed above. We do not know where (or > in some cases what!) the remaining Horcruxes are, and must assume > that if DD knew, he would have told Harry. Therefore, to find the > remaining Horcruxes you need to ask Voldemort himself. My thoughts > are that Snape will now approach Voldemort and claim that DD knew of > the Horcruxes and may have told HP where they are. Voldemort (who now trusts Snape implicitly) will give Snape the role of protecting his > Horcruxes. We have canon evidence that noone knows more about the > Dark Arts than Snape, so who better to destroy Horcruxes. Finally, I > do not think we will witness the destruction of these Horcruxes. I > think that as Harry and Voldemort come face to face for the last > time, Snape will have the satisfaction of telling Voldemort that all > his Horcruxes are gone!! And I agree with you - Snape won't survive! Carol responds: Just for fun, since we're only speculating here, I'm just going to throw my own guesses into the works. I agree that Bill Weasley's curse-breaking skills will play a role in destroying one Horcrux, probably the locket, which was formerly at 12 GP and will be traced to either Kreacher, Mundungus, or Aberforth. But I also think that, without Snape there to cure him, Bill will die, as Dumbledore would have done if not for Snape. (Note that Harry's near-fatal injury in CoS was not from the diary but from the Basilisk. That particular Horcrux was intended to be interactive. Ginny wasn't cursed when she tried to destroy it. I don't think that we can assume, based on the diary alone, that Harry is immune to Horcrux curses.) I absolutely agree that no one knows more about the Dark Arts than Snape and that he's the person most likely to know how to destroy a Horcrux without dying in the process. I think that Snape will prove his loyalty (and usefulness) to Harry by destroying a Horcrux in front of him and surviving. (His changed Patronus may also play a role in revealing his loyalty, but I think it will be a Phoenix and nor a mongoose.) If Bill destroys the locket and dies in the process, that would leave Snape to (find and?) destroy the cup and perhaps help Harry recognize and find the Ravenclaw Horcrux, which I think is the tiara, and destroy that one as well. But it will, IMO, be up destroy Nagini and fight Voldemort. After all, Harry is the hero of the story. So far as we know, Patronuses can be used to carry messages and drive off Dementors, but I don't think they could kill a large and powerful snake, especially a magical one (Nagini's venom has the power to sustain Baby!mort's life). Harry killed the Basilisk using the Sword of Gryffindor. I think that's how he'll kill Nagini as well, perhaps at Snape's suggestion. (That would be a good way to get him back to Hogwarts if he hasn't been there already.) Carol, who thinks that Snape won't die simply because that's what readers expect to happen and JKR loves to pull the rug out from under us From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 19:43:50 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:43:50 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153141 Jennifer Choi wrote: > > > based on the idea that only one or two kids get an O each year, there would only be say one new healer and one new aurorer each year; > Eggplant responded: > And McGonagall told Harry that it had been several years since anyone was picked for auroer training; they only take the best of the best. Carol notes: Tonks, who is no genius so far as we know, must have received an O in Potions in order to be admitted into Snape's NEWT Potions class, and NEWT Potions is a requirement for becoming an Auror. If Tonks can get an O, so can the Ravenclaws in Slughorn's class, the three or four brightest Slytherins, and hard-working Ernie Macmillan, who spent a minimum of seven hours a night studying for his OWLs. And the fact that the ten students other than Ron and Hermione all had their books and supplies, with no advance notice that students with an E could get into NEWT Potions, indicates strongly that all of them got O's. As for Hermione not receiving an O in DADA, she and everyone else had lousy DADA teachers for most of the first five years. Lupin taught them to deal with minor Dark creatures, but Hermione never did learn to deal with a Boggart, failing that part of Lupin's end-or-year exam and perhaps failing it in her OWL as well. That would be sufficient to keep her from earning an O on her OWL. Harry has the advantage, if it can be called that, of directly confronting everything from Dementors and Death Eaters to Voldemort himself. Hermione has only the spells she has learned and practiced under Harry's instruction in a safe setting--nothing like the instruction she would have received with proper DADA instruction for five years. Even a highly intelligent student like Hermione doesn't get O's in everything. Witness her failure at Divination. (I'll bet that Luna gets an OWL in Divination, assuming that the exams for her year are actually held, but Hermione's brain doesn't work that way.) And if that's not sufficient to explain why only one person, Harry, received a DADA OWL, I think that JKR wants to set her hero apart, to make him better than Hermione (as she says herself) at the one subject that's crucial to his fight against Voldemort. Maybe that's not realistic, but it's the way JKR wants it to be. Carol, noting that it's also unrealistic for Harry, who's taking only eight subjects, to witness five of Umbridge's inspections (two for COMC) when a random sampling of different years and different Houses would be more probable, but the plot requires us to see Umbridge in action on those occasions and the only way to do that is to have Harry witness the inspections From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 19:32:58 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:32:58 -0000 Subject: Terminal Stupidity of Snapey-Poo (was Re: Nice vs. Good - Compassion)b In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153142 > Leslie41: > > Well, you're putting words in Snape's mouth. I can't recall > anywhere that Snape himself admits that Harry is "the Chosen One". > > That's what a lot of people believe, but personally I don't think > Snape does, in part because I can't see him believing that Trelawney > is capable of a decent prophecy. Well, that is certainly one defense for Snape, I suppose -- terminal stupidity. It does raise the question, however, of how much Dumbledore tells dear old Snapey-poo. Not much, it would seem, at least from what DD claims. Which gets us back to Dumbledore's abysmal management skills. Oh well, the Hogwarts Three do seem to be linked in a circle of frustration (Harry), incompetence (DD), and hatred (Snapey-poo). As a legilimens I would guess that > he thinks divination is a bunch of drivel, especially since > Trelawney is a kook. Oh dear. That would come strong from Snapey-poo, as his explanation for legilimency, specifically his claim that it is different than mind-reading, is the very epitome of drivel. As Harry himself thought, sounds exactly like mind reading to me. > > As for trying to get Harry expelled...come on, according to > the "rules" Harry should have been expelled for the stuff he did. > Snape sees Harry as a boy who doesn't think the rules apply to him, > and Snape is right. > Actually, Harry's the one in the right, here. Many times the rules really DON'T apply to him. To appeal to JKR's quotes (always a scary business), she says something to the affect that "Dumbledore allows Harry privileges he would never allow another student." If we take that as face value, and allow, as she seems to imply, that the rules at Hogwarts are pretty much entirely under DD's control, then once again Snapey-poo is showing terminal stupidity, as he just can't get it through his head that Harry is entirely right -- the rules DON'T apply to Harry Potter. Lupinlore From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue May 30 19:46:02 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:46:02 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153143 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > Tonks: > > DD said, and we have seen, that the horcruxes are also a weapon. > They kill anyone that tries to destroy them. ...edited... > bboyminn: Sorry, but I think you are assuming facts not in evidence. My read is that Dumbledore was injured by a SEPARATE Protective Curse that was placed on the Ring to prevent anyone from /getting/ the Ring and releasing the soul-bit. I readily admit that we don't now how Horcruxes are destroyed in the sense that we don't know what is required to release the Soul-Bit, and we further don't fully know the repercussion of releasing a Soul-Bit. But we do have some examples to draw from. Harry and the Diary- This was a Memory/Horcrux combination that was /meant/ to be found and used, so naturally it doesn't have a load of extrenal protections placed on it. When Harry destroyed, or significantly damaged, the object that held the Soul-Bit, that Soul-Bit was released from the object. Harry, the Cave, and the Locket- Here we clearly see the Voldemort has placed many enchantments, obsticals, and dangers between the entrance to the cave and the Locket. These are all dangerous things that we do not see guarding the Diary. And, indeed that are dangerous and deadly; the interferi, the Green Potion, injuring oneself to open the gate, etc... Dumbledore and the Ring - We don't get the detail of what Dumbledore did to release the Soul from the Ring, but we do see that the Ring is damaged. With a degree of speculation, we can assume that that damage was all that was necessary to release the soul bit. But, just as the Locket had many protection and enchantments protecting it, we can reasonably assume that it to was protected. Now the two circumstances are different. The Locket hidden in a secret cave is the perfect place for a long complex set of wizardly and magical challenges to be face by anyone seeking the locket. But the Ring was buried at the Gaunt farm, near a passing muggle road, and that is not the place for magic boats, countless dead bodies, and a glowing-green pedestal and bowl. That is all much to obvious for an area frequented by muggles. So, Voldemort chose a completely different method of protecting the Ring. He chose to curse the Ring to injure any one who found it and tried to destroy it. There may have been an assortment of dark enchantments protecting the Ring, but the ultimate Dark Curse, was to kill a person who attempted to destroy the Horcrux. I think with each Horcrux, we will see it stored under very different circumstances, and each set of circumstances will require a completely different set of protections, and that will be part of the challenge that Harry has to face. So, my central point is that Dumbledore was most likely injured by one of the external protections guarding the Ring and not simply by the process of releasing the Soul-Bit, or by reversing the Horcrux spell. Still, we really don't know clearly how you destroy a Horcrux. Hints seem to indicate that if you damage the object the soul will be released. Harry's experience with the Diary seems to indicate that that's all their is to it, but Dumbledore's experience with the Ring hints that it might not be quite that easy. Only time will tell. Steve/bboyminn From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 13:23:34 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 13:23:34 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153144 > > Lanval: > > > Btw, how do you (and others who believe that Snape lives by the > code > > of Must-Keep-Harry-Safe) deal with the fact that both in CoS and > PoA > > he tries to have Harry expelled? How's that for the future of the > > WW, to kick the Chosen One out into the world without a magical > > education? > > Alla: > > Hehe. I know the answer. Don't you get it, he was just pretending. > You know, messing with Harry's mind. He does not really want him > expelled. He just complains to DD all the time. :) > Lanval: :) I should probably check the other books too. But in CoS he definitely tried to get both Harry and Ron expelled for the flying car episode. At the end of PoA, Harry, still dazed and confused, hears Snape say the following to Fudge in the Hospital Wing: "And yet- -is it good for him to be given so much special treatment? Personally, I try and treat him like any other student (ROTFL!). And any other student would be suspended -- at the very least -- for leading his friends into such danger. ..." Now I'm not sure if suspended here is to mean expelled? I wasn't aware Hogwarts did 'suspension', the way schools do it in the RW.... three to ten days, whatever. How would that be handled in a boarding school? So it's not entirely clear whether Snape is trying to get Harry kicked out of school here. > Alla: > > I totally think that Snape would have much preferred Sirius to be > killed legally, but also don't think that it shows Snape kindness ar > all. > > Lanval: We are in perfect agreement then. :) A note concerning my last post: I did a little research and was very surprised to learn that failure/refusal to give aid is NOT an offense in some countries. It is where I grew up, so I never bothered to check. My bad, as my son would say. However, from a personal ethical standpoint, Snape not saving Draco, and watching him die, in HBP, would have been a terrible crime. There was no danger to his own life, and he knew precisely what to do. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 20:45:43 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 20:45:43 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153145 bboyminn wrote: > My read is that Dumbledore was injured by a SEPARATE Protective Curse that was placed on the Ring to prevent anyone from /getting/ the Ring and releasing the soul-bit. > > I readily admit that we don't now how Horcruxes are destroyed in the > sense that we don't know what is required to release the Soul-Bit, and we further don't fully know the repercussion of releasing a Soul-Bit. But we do have some examples to draw from. > > Harry and the Diary- > > This was a Memory/Horcrux combination that was /meant/ to be found and used, so naturally it doesn't have a load of extrenal protections > placed on it. When Harry destroyed, or significantly damaged, the > object that held the Soul-Bit, that Soul-Bit was released from the object. > > Harry, the Cave, and the Locket- > > Here we clearly see the Voldemort has placed many enchantments, > obsticals, and dangers between the entrance to the cave and the > Locket. These are all dangerous things that we do not see guarding the Diary. And, indeed that are dangerous and deadly; the interferi, the Green Potion, injuring oneself to open the gate, etc... > > Dumbledore and the Ring - > > We don't get the detail of what Dumbledore did to release the Soul > from the Ring, but we do see that the Ring is damaged. With a degree > of speculation, we can assume that that damage was all that was > necessary to release the soul bit. But, just as the Locket had many > protection and enchantments protecting it, we can reasonably assume > that it to was protected. > > Now the two circumstances are different. The Locket hidden in a secret cave is the perfect place for a long complex set of wizardly and magical challenges to be face by anyone seeking the locket. But the Ring was buried at the Gaunt farm, near a passing muggle road, and > that is not the place for magic boats, countless dead bodies, and a > glowing-green pedestal and bowl. That is all much to obvious for an > area frequented by muggles. So, Voldemort chose a completely different method of protecting the Ring. He chose to curse the Ring to injure any one who found it and tried to destroy it. There may have been an assortment of dark enchantments protecting the Ring, but the ultimate Dark Curse, was to kill a person who attempted to destroy the Horcrux. > > So, my central point is that Dumbledore was most likely injured by one of the external protections guarding the Ring and not simply by the process of releasing the Soul-Bit, or by reversing the Horcrux spell. > > Still, we really don't know clearly how you destroy a Horcrux. Hints > seem to indicate that if you damage the object the soul will be > released. Harry's experience with the Diary seems to indicate that > that's all their is to it, but Dumbledore's experience with the Ring > hints that it might not be quite that easy. Carol responds: Essentially, I agree with you, and I think that the difference between hiding a Horcrux in a Muggle-inhabited area and hiding it in a cliffside cave is important. However, I suspect that the ring was the second Horcrux (after the diary), made by my calculations before the murder of Hepzibah Smith, and that the later Horcruxes (the ones whose creation blurred his features) had more sophisticated protections. The diary, as you say, was intended to be interactive, so it had no protections. It lured the reader into yielding up first his (her) will and then his soul or life force. I very much doubt that any other Horcrux works in quite that way. The ring was magically concealed and yet easy enough for a skilled wizard like DD to discover, but breaking it open, destroying it and releasing the soul bit, also released the curse that crawled up DD's wand arm and would have killed him had it not been for Snape's "timely action" (probably something similar to the way he prevented the cursed necklace from killing Katie). Unfortunately, DD never got around to telling Harry the "thrilling tale," so our knowledge is limited. Still, it seems to me that in this case, the curse was released at the same time as the soul bit and was intended to kill the person who destroyed the Horcrux, almost certainly to prevent his doing the same with the remaining Horcruxes. The locket was protected, as you indicate, in a more sophisticated way, intended to keep the would-be destroyer from reaching it in the first place and to kill him if he did, via either the potion or the Inferi. (I don't believe DD's explanation that LV would have wanted to know who was trying to steal the Horcrux before that person died; that seems implausible and is, IMO, intended to reassure Harry that it's okay to administer the poison to DD.) Those protections, IMO, are intended to insure that the person stealing the Horcrux never makes it out of the cave. If he survives the potion, he'll crave water and be killed by the Inferi. He won't have the opportunity to destroy the stolen Horcrux even if he has the strength. But the locket, assuming that it's the one in 12 GP (and we've already had the fake locket; we don't need another one), has at least one additional protection: it can't be opened. Like the ring, it will, IMO, have to be broken open to release the soul bit, and I would be very surprised if it doesn't release a curse in the process. I don't think that Harry has either the skill to break open a locket sealed by Dark magic or any acquired immunity to Voldemort's curses. He'll need someone else to do it. (My vote is Bill, who will die in the process, or, less plausibly because I don't see how it could be made to work, be saved by Snape.) At any rate, I don't think that LV knows when a Horcrux is destroyed. I think that the soul bits, being indestructible and immortal, enter the portal of Death to await the rest of Voldemort's soul. (He is not really alive now, merely "surviving" by unnatural means that destroying the Horcruxes, and perhaps possessing him in the end, will undo.) I agree that the protections for each Horcrux will be different, but I think that, except for Nagini, all of the later Horcruxes (cup, locket, and Ravenclaw object) will most likely involve a deadly curse like the one on the ring Horcrux that attacks the person who releases the soul bit. And I don't think Harry can destroy, or even find, most of the Horcruxes by himself. He will need help from others (the Order, Ron and Hermione, possibly Luna and Neville at some point, certainly Snape if he's DDM). I expect him to confront Voldemort alone as he's done in all the other books, but he's going to need help along the way. Whatever the case, I agree that destroying the other Horcruxes isn't going to be nearly as easy as stabbing a diary with a poisoned fang. Carol From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 21:07:42 2006 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 21:07:42 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153146 > >>Lanval: > > > > Btw, how do you (and others who believe that Snape lives by the > > code of Must-Keep-Harry-Safe) deal with the fact that both in > > CoS and PoA he tries to have Harry expelled? > > > >>Alla: > Hehe. I know the answer. Don't you get it, he was just pretending. > You know, messing with Harry's mind. He does not really want him > expelled. He just complains to DD all the time. :) > >>Leslie41: > Oh, he definitely wants Harry expelled. I'm with you on that. Betsy Hp: I'm going to disagree. When Snape is actually in a position to get Harry expelled, when Umbridge is just *aching* for an excuse, Snape doesn't help her at all. The times he *does* push for Harry to be expelled he's appealing to either McGongall or (as Alla points out) Dumbledore. Seriously, does anybody really think McGonagall or Dumbledore were going to expel Harry? So yeah, based on the fact that Snape complains to *Dumbledore* all the time, but doesn't complain to Umbridge, I'm going with the "not really wanting Harry expelled" answer. > >>Lanval: > :) I should probably check the other books too. But in CoS he > definitely tried to get both Harry and Ron expelled for the flying > car episode. Betsy Hp: He says that if Harry and Ron were in his house, he'd expel them. But Snape also concedes that the power to expel Harry lies in McGonagall's hands. Something Dumbledore verifies. > >>Lanval: > At the end of PoA, Harry, still dazed and confused, hears Snape > say the following to Fudge in the Hospital Wing: "And yet- > -is it good for him to be given so much special treatment? > Personally, I try and treat him like any other student (ROTFL!). > And any other student would be suspended -- at the very least -- > for leading his friends into such danger. ..." > Now I'm not sure if suspended here is to mean expelled? > Betsy Hp: I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that when Snape says "suspended" he means, well, "suspended". If he meant to say "expelled" he'd say "expelled". I'm quite sure Snape knows the difference between the two words. > >>Alla: > > > > I totally think that Snape would have much preferred Sirius to > > be killed legally, but also don't think that it shows Snape > > kindness ar all. > >>Lanval: > We are in perfect agreement then. :) Betsy Hp: I'm not sure anyone argued that not executing Sirius himself was an example of kindness on Snape's part. Carrying him carefully up to the castle has been suggested as such, especially compared to Sirius's actions when in a similar position. (Though I actually brought that scene up as an example of Snape treating an injured Harry with care, since it was suggested that Snape wouldn't have raised an eyebrow (I believe?) if faced with a badly injured Harry.) Though it's *also* interesting to compare Sirius's willingness (and Lupin's for that matter) to illegally kill Peter rather than turning him over to the powers that be. It suggests that Snape may hold himself to a higher principle than either Sirius or Lupin hold themselves. > >>Lanval: > However, from a personal ethical standpoint, Snape not saving > Draco, and watching him die, in HBP, would have been a terrible > crime. There was no danger to his own life, and he knew precisely > what to do. Betsy Hp: And this takes away from Snape's actions how, exactly? Betsy Hp From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Tue May 30 21:25:17 2006 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (IreneMikhlin) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:25:17 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <447CB83D.5070804@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153147 lanval1015 wrote: > > Lanval: > His 'unprofessional behavior' with Snape? Are you referring to the > Boggart scene? There was more than the boggart scene. The whole "Severus" business was very annoying. Now, I'm going out on a limb here, but the fact that this was not reciprocated suggests strongly to me that it was uninvited. Lupin has no business to be on the first name basis with Snape. It's OK for Dumbledore, who is Snape's boss and 120 years older, but it's completely out of line for Lupin. If professor McGonagall can manage to call a boy that she taught not so long ago Professor Snape in public, so can Lupin. If one of my schooldays' tormentors appeared at my work place and started behaving as if we were the best of chums, I'm not sure I'd be able to keep my cool even to the level Snape does in PoA. Irene From distaiyi at yahoo.com Tue May 30 21:32:39 2006 From: distaiyi at yahoo.com (distaiyi) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 21:32:39 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153148 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Whatever the case, I agree that destroying the other Horcruxes isn't > going to be nearly as easy as stabbing a diary with a poisoned fang. > > Carol > Sorry, just had to take issue with this statement. Let's take a moment to examine just how "easy" this was : Harry Potter was 12 and at the beginning of his Magical learning. He had to find the chamber of secrets which NO ONE (not even DD) in the history of the school had ever done (except Lord Voldemort). To get that meaningless "poisoned fang" he had to fight and defeat a beast that few ever survive meeting, much less fighting. All the while he had to deal with whatever feelings a 12 year old who is watching his best friend's sister (and closest thing to a real relative he has) dying in front of him at the feet of the "ghost" of the one person in the world who's only purpose is to destroy Harry. Maybe it's just me, but "easy" doesn't seem an apt description of this particular accomplishment. Distaiyi the Cynical From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Tue May 30 21:47:50 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 21:47:50 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153149 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > Many wizards can cast a Patronus. Only the Order uses them for > communication. Snape apparantly doesn't use them against Dementors. > So perhaps he could conceal his Patronus from the DEs. Of course, > it's still a theory that his Patronus will change. If it does, I'm > not sure how we'll know... Lolita: Well, we will know if it changes into a phoenix. It used to be DD's patronus, so it's 'available' now that DD is dead (that is, if only one person can have one kind of patronus at a time, which we don't know. There might be 50 wizards with phoenix patronuses out there, as far as we know. Or maybe I've forgotten the way that functions, in which case, feel free to remind me :)). In any case, noticing a phoenix patronus here and there throughout the book should tip us off - DD is dead - whose patronus could it be? After all, who could have been in such a shock after DD's death that their patronus should change into sth resembling DD, if not Snape? Lolita From saberbunny at yahoo.ca Tue May 30 22:14:25 2006 From: saberbunny at yahoo.ca (catherine higgins) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 18:14:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco's potion making skills. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060530221425.69265.qmail@web37206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153150 Carol notes: (snipped) Carol, noting that it's also unrealistic for Harry, who's taking only eight subjects, to witness five of Umbridge's inspections (two for COMC) when a random sampling of different years and different Houses would be more probable, but the plot requires us to see Umbridge in action on those occasions and the only way to do that is to have Harry witness the inspections Catherine now: I always figured that Umbridge deliberatly inspected Harry's classes (especially of teachers that she would think of as "close to Dumbledore" like Hagrid, McGonagall, Flitwick, Snape....). to try to get a rise out of him, as in CoMC. I really like the scene where she inspected Snape's class and the inner conflict within Harry as to whom he would have liked to see triumph.... --------------------------------- Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From keithooh1984 at time.net.my Tue May 30 06:32:51 2006 From: keithooh1984 at time.net.my (Keith Ooh ) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 14:32:51 +0800 Subject: Horcrux hunting Message-ID: <2000320f78.20f7820003@time.net.my> No: HPFGUIDX 153151 Tonks : > DD said, and we have seen, that the horcruxes are also a weapon. > They kill anyone that tries to destroy them. With this in > mind how, I ask you, is Harry going to be able to destroy them? > He almost died when he found the first one and we see what > happened to DD with the ring. As skilled a wizard as DD is, if > it were not for Snape the ring would have killed DD. tzenipie: I didn't think that the book didn't hurt Harry... It was the snake who bit him... But he got the snake fang to destroy the horcux! The curse of LV over the ring and the liquid covering the locket tried to kill Dumbledore, not Harry! From leslie41 at yahoo.com Tue May 30 23:32:12 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 23:32:12 -0000 Subject: Terminal Stupidity of Snapey-Poo (was Re: Nice vs. Good - Compassion)b In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153152 > > Leslie41: > > Well, you're putting words in Snape's mouth. I can't recall > > anywhere that Snape himself admits that Harry is "the Chosen > > One". > > > > That's what a lot of people believe, but personally I don't > > think Snape does, in part because I can't see him believing that > > Trelawney is capable of a decent prophecy. > > Lupinlore: > Well, that is certainly one defense for Snape, I suppose -- > terminal stupidity. Leslie41: I fail to see how Snape's possible disregard for Divination makes him "stupid." Hermione thinks it's hooey as well, and she's the smartest student at Hogwarts, probably. Even Harry, in GoF, thinks Trelawney is all "lucky guesswork and a spooky manner." Leslie41: > > As a legilimens I would guess that he thinks divination is a > > bunch of drivel, especially since Trelawney is a kook. > Lupinlore: > Oh dear. That would come strong from Snapey-poo, as his > explanation for legilimency, specifically his claim that it is > different than mind-reading, is the very epitome of drivel. As > Harry himself thought, sounds exactly like mind reading to me. > Leslie41: And what on earth does mind-reading have to do with divination, pray tell (as I myself am not a mind-reader)? > > Leslie41: > > As for trying to get Harry expelled...come on, according to > > the "rules" Harry should have been expelled for the stuff he > > did. Snape sees Harry as a boy who doesn't think the rules > > apply to him, and Snape is right. > > > > Lupinlore: > Actually, Harry's the one in the right, here. Many times the > rules really DON'T apply to him. To appeal to JKR's quotes > (always a scary business), she says something to the affect > that "Dumbledore allows Harry privileges he would never allow > another student." Leslie41: Often times Harry "breaks the rules" in order to save people or to do good. Often, he breaks them just for the hell of it, or to have fun, or whatever. Even Lupin chastizes him for taking the Marauder's Map and going to Hogsmeade when it was against the rules. I can see how that would annoy Snape, and anyone else who, perhaps, had to stay at Hogwarts because of a missed permission slip. > Lupinlore: > If we take that as face value, and allow, as she seems to imply, > that the rules at Hogwarts are pretty much entirely under DD's > control, then once again Snapey-poo is showing terminal stupidity, > as he just can't get it through his head that Harry is entirely > right -- the rules DON'T apply to Harry Potter. Leslie41: Ah, so Harry gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, according to you? Well, that's manifestly false, of course. And if it were true I think we would all feel about Harry the way Snape does. You see, the rules DO apply to Harry in many, if not most situations, because much of the time he breaks rules for the same reasons the Marauders did. Because he wants to have fun, or he's curious, etc. Do you think Dumbledore would have approved of Harry appearing in Hogsmeade in PoA? But I'll say this for Harry. At least Harry didn't betray the man that enabled him to attend Hogwarts by roaming about the grounds every month in full werewolf mode, endangering the safety of everyone at the school for month after month, year after year. That's a kind of rule breaking that goes beyond anything Harry's done. And I actually really *like* Remus Lupin. A whole lot. I just get a bit, well, *techy* when readers go into full attack mode over Severus Snape, and gush about how wonderful Black and Lupin are. Every nasty thing that gets done to Snape is explained away, as well as every good thing Snape himself does. I think they all deserve a good bit of slack, truthfully, which I give them--*all* of them, Snape included. And, Lupinlore, a word to the wise: Better take a different tack, than calling Snape "terminally stupid." That's never going to get you *anywhere*. From estesrandy at yahoo.com Wed May 31 00:03:45 2006 From: estesrandy at yahoo.com (Randy) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 00:03:45 -0000 Subject: CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153153 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" wrote: > > --- AnitaKH wrote: > > > > CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, > Chapter 17, A Sluggish Memory > SNIP SNIP > ~aussie~ > Times change. Laws change. (eg, in GOF, flying carpets were legal > before but illegal now) So if Tom has the ring at this age, where > did he learn the Unforgiveable curse from? > > Was it part of school study schedule then as it still may be in > Durmstrang now? It could have been taught the same way Barty Couch > Jr / Mad Eye Moody impersonator did. > > The MOM may have passed a law since Tom's time making then > Unforgivable instead of just Dark Curses. > > Or would Nocturn Alley have books on "Unforgivable Curses: 101" > and "The Idiot's Guide to Horcrux" > > After all, he didn't want DD with him when he first explored Diagon > Alley to buy his school books. > > Aussie > I bet Tom Riddle got a subscription to fabulous "GRIT" magazine and saw the advertisement. "Hey kids ! Be the first on your block to make a Horcrux!" It was right next to the ad for Sea Monkeys! Randy PS If you know what I'm talking about, you are old too! From celizwh at intergate.com Tue May 30 23:48:51 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 23:48:51 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153154 Lanval: > > > Btw, how do you (and others who believe that Snape lives by the > > > code of Must-Keep-Harry-Safe) deal with the fact that both in > > > CoS and PoA he tries to have Harry expelled? > > > Alla: > > Hehe. I know the answer. Don't you get it, he was just pretending. > > You know, messing with Harry's mind. He does not really want him > > expelled. He just complains to DD all the time. :) Leslie41: > > Oh, he definitely wants Harry expelled. I'm with you on that. Betsy Hp: > I'm going to disagree. When Snape is actually in a position to > get Harry expelled, when Umbridge is just *aching* for an excuse, > Snape doesn't help her at all. Lanval: > > :) I should probably check the other books too. But in CoS he > > definitely tried to get both Harry and Ron expelled for the flying > > car episode. > Betsy Hp: > He says that if Harry and Ron were in his house, he'd expel them. > But Snape also concedes that the power to expel Harry lies in > McGonagall's hands. Something Dumbledore verifies. houyhnhnm: What he actually does is look (to Harry) as if Christmas had been cancelled. Then he says, "Professor Dumbledore, these boys have flouted the Decree for the Restriction of Underage Wizardry, caused serious damage to an old and valuable tree--surely acts of this nature--" Surely acts of this nature what? Rowling loves those broken off statements, doesn't she? Maybe he just wants to make sure their detentions are suitably nasty. *Trying* to get someone expelled implies a little more effort than that to me. As for complaining to Dumbledore "all the time", I'd like to see some page numbers before I swallow that one. Snape has two other real opportunities to get Harry expelled and he fails to take advantage of either one of them. One of those opportunities comes when he has the ear of the Minister of Magic after having been knocked unconscious by Harry, Ron, and Hermione. If Fudge had known what really happened in the Shrieking Shack, would even Dumbledore have been able to prevent their expulsion? Instead Snape makes up a story about their having been confunded. The other is when Harry uses a Dark and potentially fatal curse on a fellow student. McGonagall is the one to bring up the E-word. She tells Harry that he is lucky not to have been expelled and that she supports wholeheartedly his Saturday detentions with Snape. Nothing at all to indicate that Snape pushed for Harry's expulsion. I may be wrong. I was wrong about Filch's nose. But I don't think there is a single instance in all six books where Snape actually uses the word "expelled" in connection with Harry. From blink_883 at hotmail.com Tue May 30 22:29:55 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:29:55 -0000 Subject: Draco's potion making skills. In-Reply-To: <20060530221425.69265.qmail@web37206.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153155 > Carol notes: > (snipped) > Carol, noting that it's also unrealistic for Harry, who's taking only > eight subjects, to witness five of Umbridge's inspections (two for > COMC) when a random sampling of different years and different Houses > would be more probable, but the plot requires us to see Umbridge in > action on those occasions and the only way to do that is to have Harry > witness the inspections > > Catherine now: > > I always figured that Umbridge deliberatly inspected Harry's classes (especially of teachers that she would think of as "close to Dumbledore" like Hagrid, McGonagall, Flitwick, Snape....). to try to get a rise out of him, as in CoMC. > WG*: Agree 100% with what Catherine said but in particular that Umbridge takes her work for the Ministry very personally (a bit like Percy, perhaps?)and having been 'alarmed' and annoyed at Harry's remarked, wanted to keep a closer eye on him - catch him out, maybe? Something however that seems less probable, IMO, is where does she get the free time from? Fair enough every teacher probably has 'free periods/lessons' or whatever, but that many? Is it then more likely that these inspections did happen in intervals of say a week or two? A thoughtful WG* From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed May 31 00:04:08 2006 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 00:04:08 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153156 > Lanval: I doubt Lupin would have picked Neville as his first example > on how to fight a boggart. And how would Lupin know that Neville's > worst fear would turn out to be Snape? Pippin: Because he's an expert legilimens? Granted he hasn't admitted to it, but Harry does notice that Lupin appears to be able to read minds. Besides no one would need to be a legilimens to note that Neville is terrified of Snape. The very predictable upshot of this episode is that Snape bullies Neville worse than ever. As far as I'm concerned, it was all about Lupin showing off at Snape's expense. He could have given Neville instructions in private, just as he did for Harry. Or he could have done what he did in the final, and had Neville go in to confront the boggart instead of letting the boggart come out. > Lanval: > So you think it's fair to judge a person's character by something he > did, or rather failed to do, at the age of fifteen? > Pippin: Tom's character at eleven was a good indicator of what he became. Lupin might have changed since then (as Tom could have) but the indications are that he hasn't. He *says* he hasn't. Lanval: > He gave DD notice, thus accepting resposibility for his failure. > Where in the next three books has he continued any kind of > untrustworthy behavior? Pippin: Lupin tells Vernon they'll be monitoring the situation at Privet Drive and asks Harry to keep in touch. Then he takes off on a mission that doesn't allow him to contact Harry. I think Harry would have appreciated knowing that Lupin hadn't just forgotten about him. Hagrid managed to let Harry know he'd be gone for a while. Lupin could have done the same. Pippin From celizwh at intergate.com Wed May 31 00:22:58 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 00:22:58 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153157 Lanval: > His 'unprofessional behavior' with Snape? Are you referring > to the Boggart scene? If so, all I have to say is this: if Snape > hadn't been overcome by utter disgust upon merely seeing > Lupin & class entering the staff room, and had refrained from > making a gratuitously nasty remark about Neville, I doubt Lupin > would have picked Neville as his first example on how to fight a > boggart. And how would Lupin know that Neville's worst fear > would turn out to be Snape? Once Neville revealed this, there > wasn't much Lupin could have done. houyhnhnm: The suggestion to dress the Snape!boggart up as an old woman came entirely from Lupin. And what was he doing taking a class into the staff room in the first place? It may not be against policy at Hogwarts to bring students into the staff room, as it is at my school, but I think it would be regarded as a violation of territory by teachers anywhere. Why not remove the boggart to the classroom? That's what he did for the Patronus lessons with Harry. It's not like Lupin has any trouble transporting a boggart. And did he not know that Snape would be there? I know when my colleagues have their free periods and I know where they can be found. The whole thing was a set-up from the get-go. Lanval: > So you think it's fair to judge a person's character by something > he did, or rather failed to do, at the age of fifteen? houyhnhnm: The child is the father to the man. From puduhepa98 at aol.com Wed May 31 00:54:35 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 20:54:35 EDT Subject: Prejudice and non-preudice in the WW Message-ID: <3be.2fb47f0.31ae434b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153158 >Clare: >Hmm, you don't know England then? To relate this to the Potterverse, have we all notice how there is no racial tension among the students in the WW? We have the Patel twins (Indian extraction) and I believe Lee Jordan is black (and of course Seamus is Irish!) , but despite other prejudices and house tensions as far as race or ethnicity goes - nothing. JKR doesn't even make a point of showing us this harmony. It just exists. In this regard the WW is an ideal society and I'm sure JKR wants her readers to absorb this easy acceptance as a contrast to the prejudice she also shows us. Thoughts? Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dontask2much at yahoo.com Wed May 31 01:53:56 2006 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (rebecca) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 21:53:56 -0400 Subject: Snape and Harry - Who dies? (Was: Horcrux hunting) References: Message-ID: <005101c68455$146a8690$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 153159 >Carol said: >I absolutely agree that no one knows more about the Dark Arts than >Snape and that he's the person most likely to know how to destroy a >Horcrux without dying in the process. I think that Snape will prove >his loyalty (and usefulness) to Harry by destroying a Horcrux in front >of him and surviving. > >After all, Harry is the hero of the story. >Carol, who thinks that Snape won't die simply because that's what >readers expect to happen and JKR loves to pull the rug out from under us rebecca: Ohhhh, Carol. Your sig lines always entice a different thought process, don't they? Thank you, thank you, thank you! I actually think Snape will die, and will be redeemed in Harry's eyes by his death in some way. This goes against the most literary epics one can compare HP to, however I rather think this septology is more geared to a coming-of-age type of fiction. Based on my interpretation of that literary style, HBP covered the following: - Our "hero" finally becoming an adult (although that won't be to the next book factually, emotionally he's already there to shoulder the burden of responsibility) - Our recent antagonist (Snape in this case) trying to make our hero emotionally a child again towards the end (review what Snape said to Harry when he admitted he was the HBP when fleeing Hogwarts) You're probably wondering why I chose Snape as the antagonist rather than Voldemort? JKR made me do it after reading her interview last summer with Mugglenet/Leaky: "JKR: Well, okay, I'm obviously - Harry-Snape is now as personal, if not more so, than Harry-Voldemort. I can't answer that question because it's a spoiler, isn't it, whatever I say, and obviously, it has such a huge impact on what will happen when they meet again that I can't." She *does* infer that the conflict between the 2 has possibly escalated beyond Voldemort-Harry at this stage, so who's the immediate seeming antagonist? Snape. One wonders that given Snape killed Dumbledore, won't Voldemort be slightly jealous of the attention Snape gets from the other Death Eaters as a result? Jealousy is a many headed beast, and my thought is LV will view Snape as a rival eventually - he most assuredly won't be happy once he's thought about it that Snape, not him, killed who is considered by many to be "the greatest wizard of the age." (This a risk when you have others do your dirty work for you, no matter how much plotting and planning you have behind the action - LV wants to be credited with what he does, ergo the diary in CoS.) Thus, Snape either dies a redemptive death, or is about to die and Harry saves him from immediate death putting Snape right back where he started: owing his life to a Potter. Talk about history repeating itself.....he can then sacrifice himself destroying a Horcrux for Harry. This latter thought, my friends, is what I predict for the 4th or 5th chapter of the book. Redemption has to happen early so Snape can sacrifice himself later for the last bit of Voldie, the one I believe to be in Harry's scar. (I don't believe this honor will be afforded to life debted Wormtail, whom I believe to be destined for Nagini lunch. Snakes *eat* rats. Ewwwww.) Just remember, eyes are the windows to the soul and from whom does Harry learn that eye contact is essential for magic? JKR basically dedicated a book to his self imposed moniker, even though the story is also about Tom Riddle's past. It's got to count for something, if her actions speak louder than words? Discuss amongst yourselves :) rebecca From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 01:57:14 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 01:57:14 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153160 > > Lanval: > I doubt Lupin would have picked Neville as his first example > > on how to fight a boggart. And how would Lupin know that Neville's > > worst fear would turn out to be Snape? > > > Pippin: > > Because he's an expert legilimens? Granted he hasn't admitted to it, > but Harry does notice that Lupin appears to be able to read minds. > Besides no one would need to be a legilimens to note that Neville > is terrified of Snape. > > The very predictable upshot of this episode is that Snape bullies > Neville worse than ever. As far as I'm concerned, it was all about > Lupin showing off at Snape's expense. He could have given > Neville instructions in private, just as he did for Harry. Or he could > have done what he did in the final, and had Neville go in to > confront the boggart instead of letting the boggart come out. Alla: Well, as far as I am concerned it was all about Neville. I admire Lupin for giving Neville the tools to LAUGH at Snape for the first time of his school career. He gave Neville the chance to laugh at the "teacher" who terrifies him so badly that he became Neville's boggart. And why should Lupin make Neville confront boggart outside of his peers seeing it? Snape just embarassed Neville very, very publicly. Everybody should know that Neville can stand up to Snape, IMO. This is true, Snape continued to bully Neville, but this is not about Snape, this is giving Neville's confidence a boost, IMO. I think Lupin nailed it by making Neville control his boggart in public. >> houyhnhnm: > Snape has two other real opportunities to get Harry expelled and he > fails to take advantage of either one of them. One of those > opportunities comes when he has the ear of the Minister of Magic after > having been knocked unconscious by Harry, Ron, and Hermione. If Fudge > had known what really happened in the Shrieking Shack, would even > Dumbledore have been able to prevent their expulsion? Instead Snape > makes up a story about their having been confunded. Alla: Of course Snape makes up a story, because his ego would not be able to swallow being overpowered by three thirteen year olds, IMO. I mean, potential hero and all that, who could not manage three teenagers. houyhnhnm: > The other is when Harry uses a Dark and potentially fatal curse on a > fellow student. McGonagall is the one to bring up the E-word. She > tells Harry that he is lucky not to have been expelled and that she > supports wholeheartedly his Saturday detentions with Snape. Nothing > at all to indicate that Snape pushed for Harry's expulsion. Alla: Um, THAT is an incident that truly deserves investigation, because Harry used an Unforgivable. I mean, I am pretty confident that very good case for self-defense can be made, but Unforgivable had been used and the letter of the law demands investigation,IMO. Funny that Snape does not indeed push for Harry's expulsion here. Maybe because Draco would not have come out of this incident smelling like a rose either and Snape does not want to risk it? > I may be wrong. I was wrong about Filch's nose. But I don't think > there is a single instance in all six books where Snape actually uses > the word "expelled" in connection with Harry. > Alla: He DOES use the word "expelled" in connection with Harry. "Most unfortunately, you are not in my House and the decision to expel you does not rest with me. I shall go and fetch people who do have that happy power"- CoS,p.79. But I am guessing that he does not really mean it here? JMO, Alla From blink_883 at hotmail.com Tue May 30 21:49:43 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 21:49:43 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153161 Carol wrote: Whatever the case, I agree that destroying the other Horcruxes isn't oing to be nearly as easy as stabbing a diary with a poisoned fang. Distaiyi wrote: Maybe it's just me, but "easy" doesn't seem an apt description of this articular accomplishment. WG* thinks: That Carol may have meant spearing the diary with a poisoned fang is relatively easier (or less arduous!) than finding out and learning whatever spells or type of magic that Dumdledore obviously knew. It seems that while many have speculated what the horcruxes are, even where they are, few have thought about how exactly Harry will destroy them. If you choose to believe it won't be Harry, then I guess this is less relevant (as the character you might think this task will fall to may be able to destroy them anyway, Snape, Aberforth, whoever). How, then, is Harry, without any idea of where to start, meant to know where to go first? Also, as a possibility, I'd like to raise the issue that it is possible DD has left Harry some papers, which may either be presented to Harry by McGonagall as DD told Harry about Grimmauld place belonging to him after Sirius died etc. Does anyone else think JKR has shed loads of stuff to include in this book? Anyone thought if she'll carry on the (relatively) linear time she's been keeping? Or maybe jump forwards a few years here and there? In HBP, Harry does say (I'm sorry I can't find the chapter now, but when the trio get their OWL results) that he still wants to become an auror, even though it was Fake!Moody that gave him this idea, he couldn't think of anything else he'd rather be, and that it would give him the best chance of survival. This would put the 'final battle' years perhaps from the time of HBP. Or, has it just not fully dawned on Harry yet? Are we anticipating things a bit? Is it possible JKR will have a - AND AFTER HARRY'S AUROR TRAINING - part? Sorry for the deviation lol. Thanks WG* From aceworker at yahoo.com Wed May 31 02:03:01 2006 From: aceworker at yahoo.com (career advisor) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:03:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Horocrux hunting In-Reply-To: <1149032148.754.28275.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20060531020301.21437.qmail@web30211.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153162 From: "Tonks" ton ks_op at yahoo.com Date: Mon May 29, 2006 9:08pm(PDT) Subject: Horcrux hunting <
> DA Jones Here: I wonder if it a coincidence that Harry has 4 Horcruxes left to destroy and 4 principal friends to help him do it: Ron Hermione Neville Luna I don't think as the char are written that any of them would let him Harry attempt to destroy them himself and there is no way Harry would let Ginny try to attempt it. Another possibility is a DA member from each house attempts it, which means that at least one Slytherin has to join the DA. In this case I vote: Hufflepuff cup -- Smith or Susan Bones who is fated to die anyway. Ravenclaw item -- Luna (I'm sorry but Luna is such a funny char that she has to die. One way in fiction of showing true horror is to kill off the funny char, besides JKR has admitted in interviews in a roundabout way that in book 7 a female will die). Locket - Draco or Ton ks (see Luna above) Snake -- Neville (No better way to show his courage then to face the beast at the end by Harry's side) I think Neville will survive which will be even more triumphant if all the previous Horcrux destroyers die. Besides Neville just has to wield the sword of Gryffindor and this is the perfect place for it. The swords magical power is to bring courage, so JKR can have fun here and have Neville say outrageously heroic things. Such as: "I'll embed this in his breast or I'm not a Gryffindor or some such silly thing." :-) Make fun of heroic char. etc... DA Jones --------------------------------- Be a chatter box. Enjoy free PC-to-PC calls with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From blink_883 at hotmail.com Tue May 30 22:00:10 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:00:10 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153163 Potioncat: Many wizards can cast a Patronus. Only the Order uses them for communication. Snape apparantly doesn't use them against Dementors. So perhaps he could conceal his Patronus from the DEs. Of course, it's still a theory that his Patronus will change. If it does, I'm not sure how we'll know... Lolita: There might be 50 wizards with phoenix patronuses out there, as far as we know. Or maybe I've forgotten the way that functions, in which case, feel free to remind me :)). WG*: What about the difficulty Harry has mastering how to even cast a patronus? I recall from what Lupin said that not every wizard can cast a patronus. Heck, not even every wizard can cast proper shield charms! Never mind ones (because in essence, isn't a patronus a shield against Dementors?) that can or can't produce a decent patronus in the presence of dementors! Has Snape even got a memory happy enough to create a patronus? Enough love, which seems to be the type of memory patronuses (patroni?) 'respond' to more? I suggest that maybe Snape has not got a patronus, revealing he is in fact not 'good', a real DE. This is why we haven't seen it, why it would give him away. Furthermore, there are two things throughout the series that stick in my mind regarding Snape - 1) DD says (in PS I seem to recall) he has a more brilliant mind, and that therefore his mistakes are accordingly bigger and 2) Harry is a good judge of character. PS, train journey. Rebuttal of Draco's 'friendship'. This is one of the first things we find out about Harry's personality, his integral character. The equivalent we have of DD, on the other hand, is him leaving the Dursley's literally on their doorstep. ohhhpppss this always happens- didn't mean to write so much heh!! WG* From zanooda2 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 01:44:33 2006 From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 01:44:33 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153164 > Carol: > I agree that the protections for each Horcrux will be different, but I > think that, except for Nagini, all of the later Horcruxes (cup, > locket, and Ravenclaw object) will most likely involve a deadly cancurse > like the one on the ring Horcrux that attacks the person who releases > the soul bit. And I don't think Harry can destroy, or even find, most > of the Horcruxes by himself. I agree with you on everything here, except on Nagini actually being a Horcrux. I still cannot believe that LV would entrust a bit of his soul to something as unreliable and as easily destroyed as a living creature. I like the idea of Harry being a Horcrux, but only if he is an "accidental Horcrux", not intentional. I don't know how this could happen, but still cannot abandon this theory. As for Nagini, DD's story about her being a Horcrux seems very fishy to me. DD says that LV used the snake to kill an old Muggle. Whom does he even mean? Frank Bryce? But LV killed Bryce himself, without using Nagini. I know you guys discussed all this before and probably came to some conclusion, but I wasn't here back then and believe me, I really regret it now. Anyway, I think that DD mentioned Nagini just to make Harry know that a living being CAN be a Horcrux. He didn't have courage to say that Harry himself is a Horcrux, and he hoped that with this piece of information Harry will figure it out himself later. zanooda From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Wed May 31 01:24:52 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 21:24:52 EDT Subject: Prejudice and non-preudice in the WW Message-ID: <480.1dc922c.31ae4a64@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153165 Nikkalmati: JKR doesn't even make a point of showing us this harmony. It just exists. In this regard the WW is an ideal society and I'm sure JKR wants her readers to absorb this easy acceptance as a contrast to the prejudice she also shows us. Thoughts? Clare: I think the mixture is part of how she shows things as they are. England is a mongrel nation and anyone with half a brain knows that there hasn't been anything "pure" in the gene pool (even the excessively inbred Royals came from elsewhere) for well over a thousand years. Perhaps it is a picture of the acceptance of what "is" but it also shows that prejudice will find somewhere to direct itself. The WW might ethnically co-exist harmoniously but they find a locus for that particular outlet in the muggles. I do not simply mean the DEs anti-muggle attitude either. The fact that the WW trusts the muggle government above all muggles is bizarre, since we certainly don't trust them. ALL of the WW accepts that muggles cannot know about the WW and have entire departments devoted to ensuring that. These departments think that they have the right to modify memory and alter aspects of the world in order to assure that - not a way to treat an equal. Then we have the counter side of the coin, where AD accepts them (within the parameters of them not knowing about the WW and thinking that it is fine and dandy to mess with their heads) to such a degree that he doesn't think that Muggle families and muggleborn witches need any kind of acclimatisation. Acceptance vs. prejudice - It is definitely a contrast. I am not convinced that it was a deliberate one though. I think it more likely that JKR already had her prejudice focus and it just didn't occur to her to deal with the other aspects of prejudice. Which would explain why she didn't make a point of pointing it out. One area where she does deal with an existing prejudice is with Seamus, but it doesn't show her in a positive light because she uses the old cliche as the basis of character. She makes him come across a bit thick and overly jolly, which plays to a rather worn-out prejudice that I would rather not have seen included. The time for the death of Irish jokes and their character counterparts is long long overdue. Ultimately her writing shows that prejudice is always present in one form or another and that even those who think that they are above it fall foul of an accepted way of thinking sometimes. I don't believe these representations to be particularly deliberate. I can't decide whether I find that depressing or refreshing. It is a depressing feature of life but it is unlikely to change; it is refreshing that that is represented in a way that has nothing to do with PC, PR, fluff-bunny-"so open minded my brain fell out" or political spin. smiles, Clare x [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celizwh at intergate.com Wed May 31 02:30:15 2006 From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 02:30:15 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153166 Alla: > > He DOES use the word "expelled" in connection with Harry. > "Most unfortunately, you are not in my House and the decision > to expel you does not rest with me. I shall go and fetch people > who do have that happy power"- CoS,p.79. > But I am guessing that he does not really mean it here? houyhnhnm: Thank you. I knew someone would save me the trouble. Snape is giving them something to think about while he's gone, so they can meditate on the seriousness of what they have done. It's called delayed consequences. He is not making a declaration of intent to lobby Dumbledore for their expulsion. He's not even making a threat, since, as he says, "the decision to expel you does not rest with me". From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed May 31 03:37:39 2006 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 03:37:39 -0000 Subject: Horocrux hunting In-Reply-To: <20060531020301.21437.qmail@web30211.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153167 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, career advisor wrote: > > Hufflepuff cup -- Smith or Susan Bones who is fated to die anyway. > Ravenclaw item -- Luna (I'm sorry but Luna is such a funny char that she has to die. One way in fiction of showing true horror is to kill off the funny char, besides JKR has admitted in interviews in a roundabout way that in book 7 a female will die). > Locket - Draco or Tonks (see Luna above) Tonks: Susan Bones is fated to die anyway?? She is???? and "JKR has admitted in interviews in a roundabout way that in book 7 a female will die"? She did? When, where, point me too it. NO NO. I don't want Molly, Luna, Hermione, Ginny, McGonagall, or TONKS to die. Allow me to nominate... Umbridge!! Or maybe Fitch's cat, that damn cat is a female. (This will spur Fitch to do magic for the first time in his life.) I will never forgive JKR if she kills off any more of my friends. She can have Snape, Mad-eye, and Harry if she must, but no more!! I put my foot down!!! Tonks_op From puduhepa98 at aol.com Wed May 31 03:54:00 2006 From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (puduhepa98 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 23:54:00 EDT Subject: Umbridge; Draco's potion making; Scary teachers Message-ID: <24e.ae274dd.31ae6d58@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153168 >Carol Does the depiction of Umbridge have any > relevance to educational trends in the UK or the "dumbing down" of > education? Surely it's more than a plot device to get a bureaucrat > into Hogwarts to thwart the students' practical training in DADA and > usurp control through her increasingly invasive decrees. > > Or are we just supposed to hate her because she's mean to Harry? > Nikkalmati: I think JKR is expressing her disdain for bureaucracies in general both in government and in education. Fudge and Scrimegeor (sp?) as well as the Muggle Prime Minister are also examples of her dislike of those whose job it is to tell other people what to do . Fudge and Scrimegeor are humorous to some degree, but Umbridge is the face of evil. She is one step short of the SS and on the downward path. Self-righteous self-satisfied, closed minded - don't get me started. Yes, we see these tendencies in education as it becomes more centralized and the power lies in the hands of those who do not spend time in the classroom but the Umbridges will take over everywhere if we let them. I think dear Doris is meant a warning to all of us. JKR prefers the independent thinkers, those who are self-reliant and tolerant. Nikkalmati >bboyminn >While a muggle-born's 'back home' friends are watching TV everyday, going to the movies on the weekend, and constantly tracking and discussing Top 40's Pop music and the latest teen heart-throb, the muggle-born his or herself is isolated for 10 months at Hogwarts completely cut off from all 'Pop' cultural references. In that degree of isolation, the local wizard culture dominates because it is the only culture that is available. Nikkalmati: I just wanted to point out too that a muggle-born student must realize that his or her future lies in the WW, unless he or she wants to give up all that training and forgo all that power. The muggle-born has to learn to fit in and make WW friends in order to enter a profession and make a go of it in the WW. That would mean giving up some muggle ways.JMO Nikkalmati < >Carol: >Maybe. But the evidence in the books is canon-canon, so to speak. It's there on the page. Ten kids each from Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, and Slytherin per the number of brooms, cauldrons, earmuffs, etc. (Lupin's DADA class in CoS, which consists only of Gryffindors, also seems to have only ten students, based on the number of Boggarts described.) Nikkalmati: The numbers here are suggestive, but it could visualize the Gryffindors etc. being separated into more that one section for various classes, there being more dormitory rooms than we see and more students than we know, but the real indication for me that there cannot be 600 students is the lack of faculty. A teacher can only teach so many classes and we are never given any hint that there are faculty members that we don't know. Nikkalmati > > Alla : > No, I did not think that Draco was just scaring other students. I > mean, think about it, if Marchbanks is indeed in Malfoys pocket , > would she mention it to her friend? > Neville does not say that it does not happen, he just says that she > never mentions Malfoys. > So, I am NOT saying that Marchbank is necessarily in Malfoy's > pocket, I am just saying that Neville line does not disprove it to > me. Nikkalmati I agree with Carol that Marchbanks is not presented as easily corruptible. Nevertheless, Neville does not say that Marchbanks would confide to his Gran that she was accepting bribes; he merely states that as far as he knows, she hardly knows the Malfoys - the exact opposite of what Draco is implying here. Could Draco be showing off and got caught by someone with even better antecedents? Nikkalmati [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From clark.kentjr at gmail.com Tue May 30 05:57:44 2006 From: clark.kentjr at gmail.com (John) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 05:57:44 -0000 Subject: What's with all the Draco love in fanon? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153169 For some reason a lot of people like to ship Draco with Harry, Ginny, or Hermione. Maybe I'm missing something here, but Draco (in canon) is a pompous, gloating, racist nitwit (up until HBP anyway, when he finally does something without yapping about it) who has been nothing but horrible to the Trio and their friends. The comparison I make for the Death Eaters and Draco and Voldemort in particular are Nazis (particulary fitting since Hitler was part Jew) or the KKK and their prejudice towards blacks. If I was black (Hermione), half black (Harry), or friends with somebody who is black why would I date somebody who thinks the world would be a better place without black people around? Is there any reason besides the actor for the character being handsome (which Draco in the book WASN'T described as being). Is it simply one of those "I can change him" situations that seems to happen with lots of girls/women? Would replacing "mudblood" with "n****r", "death eater" with nazi and "pure blood" with "aryan" in the books yield the same amount of pro-Draco stories? John Elf Note: Just a reminder for folks replying, please make sure to relate your comments to canon, as opposed to discussing this fic or that one, etc. (Discussion of specific fics, recommendations of fics, and so on, are very welcome on OTC, of course: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Wed May 31 03:08:22 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 20:08:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Why would locket in 12,GP be real horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060531030822.39415.qmail@web39103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153170 pforparvati wrote: >> Most of us think that the locket in Grimmauld Place must be the real horcrux. But we know that Harry has seen that locket in Grimmauld Place. [GoF] Harry has also seen the original locket around Merope's neck in DD's pensieve. If the two lockets would have been same, then surely Harry would have recognized it. But he has not. I mean as soon as he saw that locket in the Pensieve he would have wondered "I have seen this somewhere..."... if not immediately then at least after the cave incident...may be after some thinking... << Mathias: Well, Harry may have forgotton that he saw it, he may remember about it in the next book, but 12 GP would be a perfect place for the locket with all its security and protection spells. From honeykissed246 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 03:53:38 2006 From: honeykissed246 at yahoo.com (honeykissed246) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 03:53:38 -0000 Subject: Question about Horcrux? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153171 Hello...I am new to the group. I only recently began reading the Harry Potter series and find them quite fascinating. I did have a question about the Horcrux that was in the cave in HBP. After Dumbledore died, Harry retrieved the locket and (I think) it was not the real one and that the ACTUAL horcrux had been stolen by R.A.B. and a fake one left behind with a note. I immediately began thinking that whoever stole the original horcrux out of the cave, either one had to be Great at "Potions" (Snape) and detecting "hidden magic" because of all the barriers that had to be overcome to actually get the locket. Remember Dumbledore had to drink all the liquid before uncovering the locket and then he was not in good condition afterwards. He screamed in pain, needed water, etc. Second, remember even Dumbledore said that one person alone could not have retrieved the locket and he was grateful that Harry had accompanied him. Now if that is true, did someone accompany R.A.B. into the cave to get the orginal horcrux? I know a lot of people are saying that R.A.B. might be Sirius's brother, Regulus Black who was killed by Voldemort personally. If this is true, did someone else go with him into the cave and thus knows where the original horcrux is. I am just not sure and wanted to know what you guys thought. Again, I am new so I am not sure if this has already been discussed but it has intrigued me. Could this be one of the reasons Dumbledore trusts Snape? "honeykissed246" From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Wed May 31 05:41:49 2006 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (P. Alexis Nguyen) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 01:41:49 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] What's with all the Draco love in fanon? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153172 On 5/30/06, John wrote: > For some reason a lot of people like to ship Draco with Harry, Ginny, > or Hermione. Maybe I'm missing something here, but Draco (in canon) > is a pompous, gloating, racist nitwit (up until HBP anyway, when he > finally does something without yapping about it) who has been nothing > but horrible to the Trio and their friends. > Is there any reason besides the actor for the character being handsome > (which Draco in the book WASN'T described as being). Is it simply one > of those "I can change him" situations that seems to happen with lots > of girls/women? Would replacing "mudblood" with "n****r", "death > eater" with nazi and "pure blood" with "aryan" in the books yield the > same amount of pro-Draco stories? I'm not really a shipper, so perhaps I'm not quite part of the group you're directing your question toward. (I do, however, like the idea of Draco-Ginny since I think the characters foil each other better than Harry-Ginny, but that's a whole different story.) I do like the idea of redeemed!Draco (and am female), though, so I think I may be able to shed a tiny little bit of light on the matter, though. What you've described as how you see Draco ("pompous, gloating, racist nitwit") is not necessarily different from how I, and some others, see him. However, in an adult set in his ways, those traits would be viewed, rightly so, as repulsive. However, in a child, it pulls on the heartstrings a little and makes you root for him to be redeemed, to be tossed out into the real world and learn better how to properly act. There has been arguments about how Draco is 15 yrs old and should start to know better since 17 yrs is when wizards come of age. However, being considered an adult and being an adult are two very different things, and in my way of thinking, Draco is still a child, having been sheltered by his parents and raised to see the world in only one way without having had too much to challenge those beliefs. Combine this with the fanfic-enabled ability to actually redeem Draco, you get a lot of shippers/fans. Then again, I don't doubt that the facts that the actor is somewhat pleasing to the eye and that, as a broad generalization, do like to redeem the "bad boy" do play roles in fanon's love-affair with Draco Malfoy. What it comes down to is context. Do you see those repulsive traits alone and judge him by such? Or do you see it in the context of a sheltered boy whose beliefs have never been truly challenged? Those are my two bits, in any case. ~Ali From juli17 at aol.com Wed May 31 05:46:55 2006 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 05:46:55 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153173 Carol wrote: > So far as we know, Patronuses can be used to carry messages and drive > off Dementors, but I don't think they could kill a large and powerful > snake, especially a magical one (Nagini's venom has the power to > sustain Baby!mort's life). Harry killed the Basilisk using the Sword > of Gryffindor. I think that's how he'll kill Nagini as well, perhaps > at Snape's suggestion. (That would be a good way to get him back to > Hogwarts if he hasn't been there already.) Julie: I didn't mean to imply that Snape's *patronus* would kill Nagini. I don't think patronuses will have anything to do with destroying horcruxes. If Snape's patronus does show up in Book 7, I'm sure it will be there to reveal something about Snape, either his allegiance (Dumbledore, if it's a phoenix, for example) or some intent/desire (such as to destroy snakes--Nagini and snakelike Voldemort--if it's a mongoose). We have no evidence that patronuses can take physical action against corporeal objects, so if any horcruxes are destroyed, it will be by Snape himself. I also didn't mean to imply that Snape's personality/character resembles a mongoose, and certainly not the fictional character Rikki Tiki Tavi. The patronuses we've seen so far don't appear to represent the wizard's characteristics, rather they represent someone/something important to the wizard (Tonks' wolf/Lupin patronus) or something the wizard values (Hermione's play-loving otter?). Given that patronuses defend against dementors, I also wonder if they have a protector/guardian aspect to them. Harry's patronus represents his father, Dumbledore's represents Fawkes, Tonks's represents Lupin, and if Snape's represents a mongoose, what better symbolic protector against that snakelike creature who has so dominated Snape's life? I'm not really wedded to Snape's mongoose patronus theory. I think it's just as likely, perhaps even more likely, that Snape's patronus in Book 7 will be a changed patronus, one that can send messages to the Order without being identified (or by being identified as unquestionably loyal to Dumbledore). I just couldn't resist the poetic fit of a mongoose patronus for Snape, especially when it also fit so well with JKR's reluctance to reveal his patronus without even a change being required in Book 7. > Carol, who thinks that Snape won't die simply because that's what > readers expect to happen and JKR loves to pull the rug out from under us I hope you're right! Maybe it's time to start speculating what Snape will do with his life if he survives the wrath of Voldemort (and Harry!). Julie From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Wed May 31 05:13:50 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: The Veil and The Mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060531051350.72853.qmail@web39111.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153174 "carolinayerbe" wrote: > I'd like to know what you all think the nature of The Veil is... Tonks: >> As to the Veil. I think it is a portal to the next world, the afterlife. Luna knows that people are there, but if you remember Harry heard the voices too. I think that Luna is sensitive to the spiritual world. << Mathias: Could the veil be similar to the scaly, horse-like creature (I can't remember there names), meaning you can only hear the voices if you've seen someone die. From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Wed May 31 05:19:05 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Horcrux hunting -- the diary, helping Harry In-Reply-To: <2000320f78.20f7820003@time.net.my> Message-ID: <20060531051905.71219.qmail@web39113.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153175 > Tonks : > DD said, and we have seen, that the horcruxes are also a weapon. > They kill anyone that tries to destroy them. He almost > died when he found the first one tzenipie: > I didn't think that the book didn't hurt Harry... It was the snake > who bit him... But he got the snake fang to destroy the horcux! Mathias: But remember what the journal did to Ginny Weasley? It started to take her "life-force". Tonks: > I have been thinking about who could destroy them. And who `would' > destroy them. I expect the person who destroys the horcrux > to die doing it. DA Jones Here: > I wonder if it a coincidence that Harry has 4 Horcruxes left to > destroy and 4 principal friends to help him do it: > > Ron > Hermione > Neville > Luna > Mathias: Does anyone think that maybe the Minister of Magic could play a part or possibly the head of the Aurors?? I don't know if they would help or if Harry would allow/want them to help though, but its just an idea I'm throwing out there. From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Wed May 31 05:23:17 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape's Patronus (was Re: Horcrux hunting) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060531052317.51809.qmail@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153176 "juli17ptf" wrote: > JKR said once that she couldn't identify Snape's patronus because it > would reveal too much. Some of us thought it might reveal Snape's > true loyalty. But what if instead it reveals Snape's ultimate *role* > as a snake-killer? Tonks: > I do like your idea and it makes sense. As you or > someone else said it may have changed after Snape switched sides. Mathias: And remember that Tonks changer her Patronus due to an emotional event. Snape being a powerful wizard, could he be able to change his Patronus in front of different companies?? From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed May 31 06:55:46 2006 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 06:55:46 -0000 Subject: Question about Horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153177 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "honeykissed246" wrote: > > ...edited... I immediately began thinking > that whoever stole the original horcrux out of the cave, either > one had to be Great at "Potions" (Snape) and detecting "hidden > magic" because of all the barriers that had to be overcome to > actually get the locket. ...edited... > bboyminn: Welcome to the group, it may seem a little intimidating at first, what with those of use who have been here for years, but hang in there, follow a few interesting threads, and pretty soon you'll be one of the 'old timers' too. To your question; well of course, you are asking for the great mystery of the Series, and since that won't be answered until the end of the last book, we can only speculate, but speculation is what I do best, so... Yes, it's possible that who ever entered the cave and stole the Locket was good at Potions and detecting 'hidden magic', but it is also possible the person had inside information that allowed them to bypass some or all of the protective enchantments. Logically, Voldemort must have a way of doing this, in case he ever wants to check on or retrieve a particular Horcrux. He certainly wouldn't want to battle all the protections, so I think he would have a way around them. One way for such a person to have foreknowledge of the protections would be for them to be in contact with Snape. Even if Snape doesn't have full knowledge, he could certainly help them prepare to deal with each enchantment in a way that minimized it. Or, this person, R.A.B., may have discovered some of Voldemort secret information on his own. That may have been enough to by-pass the enchantments, or it may have given him enough information to learn how to best defeat the particular protective enchantments. I'm not saying this is true, but the books don't contradict it either. > honeykissed246 continues: > > ... Dumbledore said that one person alone could not have retrieved > the locket ... Now if that is true, did someone accompany R.A.B. > into the cave to get the orginal horcrux? ...edited... > > "honeykissed246" > bboyminn: Right now I think most people think that R.A.B. is Regulus Black, and most people currently are inclined to think that Kreacher assisted Regulus in obtaining the Locket. That accounts for Kreacher's current slightly demented state of mind. My speculation is that Regulus was killed soon after visiting the Cave and the Locket was still in his possession when he was killed. Regulus's possessions were turned over to his parents, and that is how the Locket came to be in the Black House. I'm not sure how accurately we can trust Sirius's account of what happened to his brother. Most of his information seems to be supposition and second hand information. I suspect that Sirius was right, and Regulus was killed because he wanted to leave the Death Eaters. I don't think it was because he knew about the Horcruxes. I also think it is true that Voldemort did not personally kill Regulus, he merely had him disposed of. I think Regulus turned against Voldemort for a variety of reason. As Sirius suspects, Regulus did not like what he was being asked to do. While I can't prove it, I think it went beyond that; I think Regulus had a true change of heart. He saw that Voldemort's pure-blood talk was just that 'talk'. It was an excuse or a rallying point, to gather troups and keep the masses content, while Voldemort went off and did what ever he wanted. I think Regulus saw Voldemort for the fake he was, and knew his 'war' had nothing to do with pure-bloods and everything to do with power, control, and wealth. If R.A.B. really is Regulus Black then it would seem that Regulus didn't simply want to quit the Death Eaters, instead, he truly turned against Voldemort, and in stealing the Horcrux Locket was doing his part to bring an end to Voldemort. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Wed May 31 07:40:45 2006 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 07:40:45 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153178 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "whirledgirl" wrote: > That Carol may have meant spearing the diary with a poisoned fang is > relatively easier (or less arduous!) than finding out and learning > whatever spells or type of magic that Dumdledore obviously knew. Or maybe not. Harry seems to have a strong intuitive feeling of how to fight Voldemort (or perhaps lots of luck). How many people would have thought of spearing the diary? In some way I suspect the scar he got gave him that instictive understanding of the way Voldemort operates and how to defeat him. despite the fact that his magical skills are so far below him. > If you choose to believe it won't be Harry, then I guess this > is less relevant (as the character you might think this task will fall > to may be able to destroy them anyway, Snape, Aberforth, whoever). > How, then, is Harry, without any idea of where to start, meant to know > where to go first? I believe that the reason JKR created so many Horcruxes is to force Harry to ask for help. He can't find and destroy the 4 remaining Horcruxes by himself, so he'll have to rely on others (probably Ron, Hermione and Ginny plus OOP and DA members and whatever information Sirius' brother may have left in Grimmauld Place). > In HBP, Harry does say ... that he still wants to become an > auror [deleted]. This would put the 'final battle' > years perhaps from the time of HBP. Or, has it just not fully dawned > on Harry yet? Are we anticipating things a bit? Is it possible JKR will > have a - AND AFTER HARRY'S AUROR TRAINING - part? At the end of HBP Harry seems to outgrow that desire. He appears pretty fed up with the Ministry (in particular the MoM who was the head of the auror office until Fudge was fired). He talks rather disparagingly about the ability of the two aurors the MoM is offering to him when he has to confront Voldemort. So no, I just can't see HP going to work and sit in an auror cubicle every day - certainly not after he defeats (if he does) LV - but not before either. If he does not plan to return to school, he won't have the prerequisites anyway. Salit From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Wed May 31 08:53:02 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 08:53:02 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153179 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "whirledgirl" wrote: Has Snape even got a memory > happy enough to create a patronus? Enough love, which seems to be > the type of memory patronuses (patroni?) 'respond' to more? > I suggest that maybe Snape has not got a patronus, revealing he is > in fact not 'good', a real DE. This is why we haven't seen it, why > it would give him away. Lolita: Yes, he can cast a patronus. Remember in OotP, when DD says to Harry that Snape realised that Harry thought that sth might be wrong with Sirius, and then *contacted him immediately*? DD then goes on to say that the Order have a more reliable means of communication than Floo. And then later, in answer to her FAQ poll, Rowling said that yes, they do have more reliable means of communication, and that is via Patronuses. So, what Snape used to contact Sirius *immediately* was, indeed, a Patronus. Besides, I do not think that Snape was a 'poor, unloved little thing'. He may not be the most content person there is, but I don't believe he is such an unhappy soul as fans so often want him to be. We do have a cannon fact that at least DD thought well enough of and probably cared about him. And so do the Malfoys, it seems. When you think about it, even Lupin, whose life has probably been *much* more miserable than Snape's (being afflicted with a terrible, incurable curse since his earliest childhood and therefore almost always unemployed, shunted and avoided), can cast a Patronus. Happy memories aside, if what it takes to cast a Patronus is skill and power, we have been led to believe that Snape is a powerful wizard indeed, and therefore, looked at from that side (e.g. power) only, he has no problems in casting a Patronus. As far as not using Patronuses to repel Dementors - we know he doesn't, since he doesn't agree with Harry on the best way to fight them, and we do know that Harry uses a Patronus - he probably uses occlumency. Which, in a way, may even *be* a better way - you don't need a wand, and if you close your mind (emotions and such), they might not even detect you. Harry's method, you will recall, includes *fight*. Snape's probably includes flying under the Dementors' radar. Cheers, Lolita. From lolita_ns at yahoo.com Wed May 31 09:16:45 2006 From: lolita_ns at yahoo.com (lolita_ns) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 09:16:45 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153180 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > Well, you're putting words in Snape's mouth. I can't recall > anywhere that Snape himself admits that Harry is "the Chosen One". Lolita: 'Detention, Saturday night, my office,' said Snape. 'I do not take cheek from anyone, Potter... not even the Chosen One.' (HBP, British ed, p. 171) >leslie41: >[snip] I can't see him [Snape] believing that Trelawney > is capable of a decent prophecy. As a legilimens I would guess that > he thinks divination is a bunch of drivel, especially since > Trelawney is a kook. Lolita: Having heard and delivered the partial prophecy to LV - the prophecy he absolutely *knew* Trelawney had made - I would say that Snape does indeed believe her capable of making the real thing, now and then. > Leslie41: > > Because Snape's a known coward who never, > ever does anything "risky." Lolita: Oh, yes, because going to the shrieking shack to face a werewolf in the night of the full moon is just such a cowardly and unrisky thing to do. And responding late to LV's collective summons, while you probably know he doesn't think highly of your loyalty is just a walk in the park, no risk included whatsoever, because LV is such a wonderful, forgiving human being. Giving fake potion to a known enemy and declaring it a real thing is also in no way risky, as is not risky making an unbreakable vow whose defaulting may result in your death. And killig sb who was your mentor and friend, all for a higher cause (I believe that SS is DD's man) is also very cowardly. These are just a few *cowardly things with no risk involved* that I can think of without consulting all the books. What a coward, indeed! P.S. This *was* sarcasm, of course. Lolita. From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Wed May 31 10:08:27 2006 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 10:08:27 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153181 Carol wrote: > > I absolutely agree that no one knows more about the Dark Arts than > Snape and that he's the person most likely to know how to destroy a > Horcrux without dying in the process. I think that Snape will prove > his loyalty (and usefulness) to Harry by destroying a Horcrux in >front of him and surviving. (His changed Patronus may also play a >role in revealing his loyalty, but I think it will be a Phoenix and >nor a mongoose.) If Bill destroys the locket and dies in the >process, that would leave Snape to (find and?) destroy the cup and perhaps help > Harry recognize and find the Ravenclaw Horcrux, which I think is the > tiara, and destroy that one as well. Brothergib replies: I cannot see any situation where Snape and Harry will join forces. Where would the conversation that brings them together even begin!! Also, Snape is doing this for his own selfish reasons. I'm sure that the fact that Harry is intricately involved in Voldemort's eventual downfall annoys Snape incredibly. Snape will do his thing behind the scenes, and his true colours won't be revealed until the end. There is also a very good chance that if Snape destroys all the Horcruxes (or at least knows they are all gone) that he will attempt to destroy Voldemort himself! From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Wed May 31 12:00:48 2006 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 12:00:48 -0000 Subject: The Bloody Baron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153182 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jelly92784" wrote: > > Kim wrote: > The ghosts still fascinate me, especially the Bloody Baron. Doesn't > he look a bit like Snape? Of course, if they're related that blows > my theory that he's Slytherin since Snape wasn't the heir. ... > Scholastic US Paperback, page 124: > Harry looked over at the Sytherin table and saw a horrible ghost > sitting there, with blank staring eyes, a gaunt face, and robes > stained with silver blood. > > Janelle: > I read this and my eye immediately stuck on the word "gaunt", as > in "The House of Gaunt". Any possibility that JKR is giving us a > clue and that the bloody baron has some relation here? This fits > with Kim's idea about the possibility of the Baron being Salazar > Slytherin himself as the Slytherin family became the Gaunt family. > > An interesting side note, I decided to look up the word gaunt and > one of the definitions was "Bleak and desolate; barren", drawing > another connection to the Bloody Baron. > Aussie I agree with the "gaunt" clue, but think the Baron is more emotionally connected with Salazar - his Father. The BOLLD is from muggle attacks which turned Salazar so resentful against muggles. The Baron was also frequenting the Astrology Tower in HBP. The same place predicted to be "Lightening struck" by Trelawney's Tarot cards and finally DDs last stand where the Death Head hovered above. The Bloody Baron, however, was there before all this. Nearly Headless Nick commented on it to Harry when he mistook Harry asking for where DD was. That made me suspect the Bloody Baron a bit more on my 2nd read. **Canon backing for this - (COS 9) They built this castle together, far from prying Muggle eyes, for it was an age when magic was feared by common people, and witches and wizards suffered much persecution. ... Slytherin wished to be more selective about the students admitted to Hogwarts. He believed that magical learning should be kept within all-magic families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy. Slytherin wished to be more selective about the students admitted to Hogwarts. He believed that magical learning should be kept within all-magic families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy. ** From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 13:14:21 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 13:14:21 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153183 > > Leslie41: > > Well, you're putting words in Snape's mouth. I can't recall > > anywhere that Snape himself admits that Harry is "the Chosen > > One". > > Lolita: > > 'Detention, Saturday night, my office,' said Snape. 'I do not take > cheek from anyone, Potter... not even the Chosen One.' (HBP, > British ed, p. 171) Leslie41: There's a difference between knowing that Harry is *considered* the chosen one, and actually believing it. Snape is obviously being sarcastic here, especially considering the context. I would say this is evidence Snape *doesn't* believe Harry is the "Chosen One," just that he knows others believe it and he thinks it's suspect. > >leslie41: > > > > [snip] I can't see him [Snape] believing that Trelawney > > is capable of a decent prophecy. As a legilimens I would guess > > that he thinks divination is a bunch of drivel, especially since > > Trelawney is a kook. > > Lolita: > > Having heard and delivered the partial prophecy to LV - the > prophecy he absolutely *knew* Trelawney had made - I would say > that Snape does indeed believe her capable of making the real > thing, now and then. > Leslie41: While I don't deny that *may* be true, I don't think it's true from the evidence you've provided. You're suggesting that Snape believes the prophecy because he *reports* it. Reporting what someone says doesn't mean you necessarily believe it. > > Leslie41: > > > > Because Snape's a known coward who never, ever does > > anything "risky." > > Lolita: > > Oh, yes, because going to the shrieking shack to face a werewolf > in the night of the full moon is just such a cowardly and unrisky > thing to do. And responding late to LV's collective summons, while > you probably know he doesn't think highly of your loyalty is just > a walk in the park, no risk included whatsoever, because LV is > such a wonderful, forgiving human being. Giving fake potion to a > known enemy and declaring it a real thing is also in no way risky, > as is not risky making an unbreakable vow whose defaulting may > result in your death. And killig sb who was your mentor and > friend, all for a higher cause (I believe that SS is DD's man) is > also very cowardly. These are just a few *cowardly things with no > risk involved* that I can think of without consulting all the > books. What a coward, indeed! > > P.S. This *was* sarcasm, of course. > > Lolita. Leslie41: Yah, of course. As was my statement. From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 31 15:41:30 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:41:30 -0000 Subject: What's with all the Draco love in fanon? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153184 > John > Is there any reason besides the actor for the character being handsome > (which Draco in the book WASN'T described as being). Is it simply one > of those "I can change him" situations that seems to happen with lots > of girls/women? Magpie: No, it's not the actor. It was around before the movies and even since then I don't think the actor is so important in himself. I'd say the reasons for it are as numerous as the number of people who like the character. There are probably some "I want to change him" people in there, but there's no reason fans of one character should be reduced to dismissive stereotypes more than any other. Draco's always been a character in an interesting situation. Many people argued long before HBP that his situation and set up meant he had to play a part somewhere. There aren't a lot of kids in canon that have any characterization that are in his type of situation; he offers a lot of things for a fanfic writer to explore. Fanon can do different things with a character so that people can keep things they like, lose things they don't like, shade things one way or another. I mean, the funny thing about all the "why would people write about him?" is that of course ultimately the author was one of them. He's not the hero of a fanfic story or anything like that, but her story definitely echoed plenty of Draco fics (though given fanon's obsession with romance, in fanfic it was more often played out via shipping). Iow, many Draco fanfic authors were interested in the same things about the character that seem to interest the author. -m From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 17:15:25 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:15:25 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153185 Julie wrote: > I didn't mean to imply that Snape's *patronus* would kill Nagini. I > don't think patronuses will have anything to do with destroying > horcruxes. If Snape's patronus does show up in Book 7, I'm sure it will be there to reveal something about Snape, either his allegiance > (Dumbledore, if it's a phoenix, for example) or some intent/desire > (such as to destroy snakes--Nagini and snakelike Voldemort--if it's a mongoose). We have no evidence that patronuses can take physical action against corporeal objects, so if any horcruxes are destroyed, it will be by Snape himself. Carol responds: Sorry I misunderstood you! I agree that Snape, as opposed to his Patronus, may very well destroy at least one Horcrux, but I don't think it will be Nagini. (I think that's Harry's battle, foreshadowed by the battle with the Basilisk in CoS: Harry, in the graveyard, with the Sword of Gryffindor.) I also agree that Snape's Patronus, whether or not it changes, will reflect something about him, which is why JKR is concealing it from us. Regarding the idea, raised by another poster, that Snape might be unable to cast a Patronus because he has no happy memories, I'd like to point out that Tonks can still cast a Patronus when she's severely depressed, and Snape must be able to cast one or he wouldn't be able (pre-Tower scene) to communicate with other Order members. Dumbledore tells Harry, in reference to Snape's communications with Sirius Black before the Battle of the MoM, that Order members have more reliable means of communication than the Floo network, and he's clearly referring to Patronuses here. So I'd say it's almost a given that Snape does have one. We just haven't seen it because it would give too much away. Julie: > I also didn't mean to imply that Snape's personality/character resembles a mongoose, and certainly not the fictional character Rikki Tiki Tavi. Carol: No, I didn't think you did! Julie: The patronuses we've seen so far don't appear to represent the wizard's characteristics, rather they represent someone/something important to the wizard (Tonks' wolf/Lupin patronus) or something the wizard values (Hermione's play-loving otter?). Given that patronuses defend against dementors, I also wonder if they have a protector/guardian aspect to them. Carol: Exactly. JKR refers to them on her website as "spirit guardians." Some people see them as totems, which doesn't reflect a European tradition that I know of (folklore experts please correct me it I'm wrong) but does fit with the animal form of the Patronuses we've seen so far. At any rate, "patronus" is an actual Latin word for "protector, defender, patron" (derived from "pater," father) and was in medieval times associated with patron saint. (I also think of guardian angels in this context, but I'm not sure that I can justify that concept etymologically.) Julie: Harry's patronus represents his father, Dumbledore's represents Fawkes, Tonks's represents Lupin, and if Snape's represents a mongoose, what better symbolic protector against that snakelike creature who has so dominated Snape's life? Carol: Interesting concept, but I'm sure that Snape's spiritual protector is Dumbledore. (Not that I can prove it, of course!) It would be funny if his original patronus was a bumblebee (dumbledore = bumblebee), but Snape is, erm, not exactly a comic figure (despite some humorous moments involving him pre-HBP), I don't think that's the case. My vote is a phoenix for his Book 7 patronus, whether or not it's changed. (BTW, I'm curious about Snape's alternate method of fighting a dementor, which I think will prove important when Ron and Hermione find themselves unable to conjure a patronus outside the RoR.) > Julie: > I'm not really wedded to Snape's mongoose patronus theory. I think it's just as likely, perhaps even more likely, that Snape's patronus in Book 7 will be a changed patronus, one that can send messages to the Order without being identified (or by being identified as unquestionably loyal to Dumbledore). Carol: Yes. You can't fake a patronus, and that seems like the best way for Snape to initiate communication with the Order. I keep hoping that Lupin will ask Harry questions and realize that his interpretation of the events doesn't quite fit with some of Snape's actions (or the usual results of an AK) and may already be wondering whether Snape is actually loyal to DD despite appearances. At any rate, it's all speculation at this point. > > Carol, who thinks that Snape won't die simply because that's what readers expect to happen and JKR loves to pull the rug out from under us > Julie: > I hope you're right! Maybe it's time to start speculating what Snape will do with his life if he survives the wrath of Voldemort (and Harry!). Carol: Aha! A new just-for-fun thread! There's always the potions lab on a tropical island suggested in a Leaky poll, but personally I prefer having him use his brilliant mind and many talents for the good of the WW as a researcher/healer for St. Mungo's. Carol, who should probably give up posting and just do sig lines ;-) From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 14:26:25 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 14:26:25 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: <447CB83D.5070804@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153186 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, IreneMikhlin wrote: > Now, I'm going out on a limb here, but the fact that this > was not reciprocated suggests strongly to me that it was uninvited. > Lupin has no business to be on the first name basis with Snape. Lanval: Of course he does. They're contemporaries; they were at school together. Whether Snape likes it or not is another thing. Irene: > If professor McGonagall can manage to call a boy that she taught not so > long ago Professor Snape in public, so can Lupin. Lanval: Don't know which scene precisely you're referring to, but if it's in front of students, it's to be expected. There really are no set rules in the WW, are there? McGonagall and Trelawney call one another by their first names, though there's no love lost between them. Fudge calls everyone but DD (I think) by their first name. No teacher calls Hagrid by his first name (again, I'm not sure, but can't recall any example), though he'd be the last person to mind. Then there's Arthur Weasley, known to all and sundry as 'Arthur', who also calls everyone but DD by their first name, even Malfoy. So Lupin calling people by their first name is just him being Lupin. As for the notion that he calls Snape 'Severus' merely to annoy him, well, canon would refute that: he still calls him 'Severus' with Snape's wand pointed at him, in the Shrieking Shack. And whatever Lupin may be, stupid he's not. Also: are you saying that Snape is showing Lupin more respect than vice versa? Because I sincerely doubt that. He calls him 'Lupin' to his face, when they're *alone* (Harry of course having to be about, for narrative reasons). No title. Same way he snarls 'Potter', or 'Longbottom'. Even in front of the class, Snape slips once and simply refers to him as 'Lupin'. Lupin, on the other hand always reminds Harry & friends that it's 'Professor Snape'. Irene: > If one of my schooldays' tormentors appeared at my work place and > started behaving as if we were the best of chums, I'm not sure I'd be > able to keep my cool even to the level Snape does in PoA. > Lanval: Guess we're different then. I'd simply assume, until further notice, that this person had decided to move on, stopped being childish, and was making an effort to be pleasant. From mros at xs4all.nl Wed May 31 07:52:16 2006 From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 09:52:16 +0200 Subject: Snape's Patronus (was Re: Horcrux hunting) References: <20060531052317.51809.qmail@web39106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000301c68487$22c030f0$63fe54d5@Marion> No: HPFGUIDX 153187 > "juli17ptf" wrote: >> JKR said once that she couldn't identify Snape's patronus because it >> would reveal too much. Some of us thought it might reveal Snape's >> true loyalty. But what if instead it reveals Snape's ultimate *role* >> as a snake-killer? If it 'reveals too much', logic woud suggest that Snape's patronus would definitely show which side he is on. Since I'm firmly in the 'Snape's a White Hat' camp, my guess would be that his patronus is a phoenix, just like Dumbledore's. It would make sense too. Those two have been joined at the hip, playing 'good cop - bad cop' for *years* (really, Snape gliding billowy through the halls,with his slicked back hair like the Demon King from a Christmas Pantomime and Albus Dumbledore with his spangly robes, his sweets and his twinkle - they are laying it on quite *thick*, don't you think?) They are two sides of the same coin, so why wouldn't they have the same patronus? Marion From lanval1015 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 15:51:36 2006 From: lanval1015 at yahoo.com (lanval1015) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:51:36 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153188 > Pippin: > > Because he's an expert legilimens? Granted he hasn't admitted to it, > but Harry does notice that Lupin appears to be able to read minds. > Besides no one would need to be a legilimens to note that Neville > is terrified of Snape. Lanval: Eh, no offense, Pippin, but that's part of your ESE!Lupin theory, isn't it? :) Which I don't buy (yet). Lupin may be a Legilimens, but as far as I'm aware there's no proof. If one looks at the scene, there's also no way for Lupin to realize that Neville is terrified of Snape. Neville turns bright red at Snape's comment -- that's embarassment, shame; not terror. When Neville starts trembling and looking scared, it's because he's to be first in line for the task, and the more he hears about it, the more frightened he gets. How much does Lupin know about Neville's family? I forgot, but isn't his parents' fate common knowledge? In other words, there's no reason to believe that Lupin would have suspected a boy with Neville's past to be haunted in his sleep by his Potions Master. > houyhnhnm: > > The suggestion to dress the Snape!boggart up as an old woman came > entirely from Lupin. Lanval: My mind's reeling, thinking of what other and possibly MUCH worse scenarios he might have come up with. He HAD to make him look ridiculous, right? > houyhnhnm: And did he not know that Snape would be there? I know when my colleagues have their free periods and I know where they can be found. The whole thing was a set-up from the get-go. Lanval: A set-up? Lupin had a cunning plan? He lay awake at night, maliciously scheming how to humiliate his old enemy? That would involve: 1.) prior knowledge of Neville's worst fear 2.) prior knowledge that Snape would be present, which is against the odds. Lupin says this: p.133 Scholastic HB Ed.: "This one (boggart) moved in yesterday afternoon, and I asked the headmaster if the staff would leave it to give my third years some practice." Seems the staff, having left the boggart alone, also politely vacated the room since DD informed them that Lupin would be holding class there. Lupin's hardly invading Snape's privacy, nor is the class's arrival a surprise for Snape, nor is Lupin violating common school rules, since DD ok'd it. Perhaps Snape decided to hang around just long enough to get in a little swipe at either Lupin or one of favorite students...? His "glittering eyes" and the "nasty sneer playing around his mouth" hardly speaks of surprise, or anger at being disturbed. If anyone is doing a set-up here, it's Snape. Granted, Snape's presence does not really matter, if Lupin intended to pick on Snape. But I still find it very hard to believe that he would have guessed Neville's worst fear (Legilimency aside, of course). And from a purely narrative point the scene *needs* Snape to be present -- because the beauty of it (while I can't speak for the author, this is exactly the kind of karmic punishment she appears to be fond of) lies in the fact that Snape's mean remark sets the events in motion. Pippin: > The very predictable upshot of this episode is that Snape bullies > Neville worse than ever. Lanval: p.139: "This time Neville charged forward looking determined. 'Riddikulus!' he shouted, and they had a split second's view of Snape in his lacy dress before Neville let out a great 'Ha!' of laughter, and the boggart exploded..." ...'Excellent!' cried Professor Lupin as the class broke into applause." And ten points for Neville. I think it can safely be argued that this episode did more for Neville's self-confidence than anything else in his two years at Hogwarts, the points in SS/PS included. Snape hates and bullies him no matter what. Now at least Neville has the lovely memory of boggart!Snape to cheer him up when things get rough in Potions. Btw, this was the same day Snape threatened to poison Trevor. Yes, I do think JKR let Neville have his little revenge. Pippin: As far as I'm concerned, it was all about > Lupin showing off at Snape's expense. He could have given > Neville instructions in private, just as he did for Harry. Or he could > have done what he did in the final, and had Neville go in to > confront the boggart instead of letting the boggart come out. Lanval: ANY of the kids could have come up with a 'worst fear' that might have proved embarrassing for one of the staff, or Lupin, or for the student himself most of all. It's the nature of the lesson! What's Lupin going to do, hold ALL the lessons individually? And why would he send Neville inside the wardrobe to confront the boggart without any help? Just to spare Snape's feelings?? If Snape is Neville's worst fear, why must Snape be protected? Nevermind that this would have been asinine, since the rest of the students are supposed to learn from what they witness with Neville as an example, and draw ideas and confidence from what their classmates are using as a defense. From enlil65 at gmail.com Wed May 31 17:43:20 2006 From: enlil65 at gmail.com (Peggy Wilkins) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 12:43:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1789c2360605311043v7dc31f4ei401614d1e42e13ed@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153189 On 5/30/06, distaiyi wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: > > Whatever the case, I agree that destroying the other Horcruxes isn't > > going to be nearly as easy as stabbing a diary with a poisoned fang. Distaiyi: > Sorry, just had to take issue with this statement. Let's take a moment > to examine just how "easy" this was : > > Harry Potter was 12 and at the beginning of his Magical learning. > He had to find the chamber of secrets which NO ONE (not even DD) in > the history of the school had ever done (except Lord Voldemort). > To get that meaningless "poisoned fang" he had to fight and defeat a > beast that few ever survive meeting, much less fighting. > All the while he had to deal with whatever feelings a 12 year old who > is watching his best friend's sister (and closest thing to a real > relative he has) dying in front of him at the feet of the "ghost" of > the one person in the world who's only purpose is to destroy Harry. > > Maybe it's just me, but "easy" doesn't seem an apt description of this > particular accomplishment. Peggy W: All excellent points, and I would only add that we don't actually know that it was just the poison Basilisk fang that destroyed the diary/Horcrux. The fang was covered with Harry's own blood (IIRC he removed it from his arm), so for all we know, it may have been Harry's blood that destroyed the Horcrux. I have wondered about this for some time. -- Peggy Wilkins enlil65 at gmail.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 17:52:27 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:52:27 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153190 Leslie41 wrote: > There's a difference between knowing that Harry is *considered* the > chosen one, and actually believing it. Snape is obviously being > sarcastic here, especially considering the context. I would say > this is evidence Snape *doesn't* believe Harry is the "Chosen One," > just that he knows others believe it and he thinks it's suspect. > Carol responds: Or he could be pretending not to believe it because DE!Draco is in the class. (However, he's not pretending that he doesn't take cheek, even from celebrities or heroes!) I think that his statement to Bellatrix that Harry is a mediocre wizard is along the same lines: he doesn't want the DEs to realize that Harry is a real threat, or that his somewhat underdeveloped wizarding skills have nothing to do with the threat he poses (which I think Snape guesses has everything to do with the powers Harry acquired at Godric's Hollow, including Parseltongue and the scar connection, both of which Snape knows about). Leslie41 earlier: > > > Because Snape's a known coward who never, ever does anything "risky." > > Lolita responded: > > Oh, yes, because going to the shrieking shack to face a werewolf > > in the night of the full moon is just such a cowardly and unrisky > > thing to do. And responding late to LV's collective summons, while > > you probably know he doesn't think highly of your loyalty is just > > a walk in the park, no risk included whatsoever, because LV is > > such a wonderful, forgiving human being. Giving fake potion to a > > known enemy and declaring it a real thing is also in no way risky, > > as is not risky making an unbreakable vow whose defaulting may > > result in your death. And killig sb who was your mentor and > > friend, all for a higher cause (I believe that SS is DD's man) is > > also very cowardly. These are just a few *cowardly things with no > > risk involved* that I can think of without consulting all the > > books. What a coward, indeed! > > > > P.S. This *was* sarcasm, of course. > Leslie41: > Yah, of course. As was my statement. > Carol: It scared me for a moment to see Leslie41's statement about Snape as a "known coward" quoted out of context. Since I knew her to be a Snape supporter, I went back upthread and confirmed that it was indeed a sarcastic comment. Sarcasm can be misleading if taken at face value, and you two, as far as I can determine, are on the same side. Carol, who agrees with both of you that whatever Snape may be, it's not a coward From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 18:11:18 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 18:11:18 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153191 > Carol responds: > Or he could be pretending not to believe it because DE!Draco is in the > class. (However, he's not pretending that he doesn't take cheek, even > from celebrities or heroes!) Alla: Personally I thought that it was great that six books after that JKR totally mocked his taking points from Harry IMO by Slugghorn saying the same line that Snape did, the only difference being that he gave points to Harry. To me, it spoke volumes that Snape was not testing any theories or had any underlying reasons for doing what he did. Just petty behaviour towards the child, IMO. > Lolita responded: And killig sb who was your mentor and > > > friend, all for a higher cause (I believe that SS is DD's man) is > > > also very cowardly. These are just a few *cowardly things with no > > > risk involved* that I can think of without consulting all the > > > books. What a coward, indeed! > > > > > > P.S. This *was* sarcasm, of course. Alla: Of course if one believes that Snape may not be DD!M, than his behaviour on the Tower becomes the very epithome of cowardice. JMO, Alla From clark.kentjr at gmail.com Wed May 31 16:54:34 2006 From: clark.kentjr at gmail.com (John) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 16:54:34 -0000 Subject: What's with all the Draco love in fanon? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153192 > Magpie: > No, it's not the actor. It was around before the movies and even since > then I don't think the actor is so important in himself. I'd say the > reasons for it are as numerous as the number of people who like the > character. There are probably some "I want to change him" people in > there, but there's no reason fans of one character should be reduced > to dismissive stereotypes more than any other. It's not just dismissive stereotypes, it's the way he's acted through six of the books. I always imagined him as a wizarding version of Dudley, somebody who picks on those who can't defend themselves simply because they can. Whether Draco is redeemed in book 7 or not could go either way, but no matter the outcome I can't see a scenario where Harry, Hermione, Ginny, etc would ever be in a relationship with him considering the past years of torment. > Draco's always been a character in an interesting situation. Many > people argued long before HBP that his situation and set up meant he > had to play a part somewhere. There aren't a lot of kids in canon > that have any characterization that are in his type of situation; he > offers a lot of things for a fanfic writer to explore. Fanon can do > different things with a character so that people can keep things they > like, lose things they don't like, shade things one way or another. I > mean, the funny thing about all the "why would people write about > him?" is that of course ultimately the author was one of them. He's > not the hero of a fanfic story or anything like that, but her story > definitely echoed plenty of Draco fics (though given fanon's obsession > with romance, in fanfic it was more often played out via shipping). > Iow, many Draco fanfic authors were interested in the same things > about the character that seem to interest the author. > I don't have a problem with him being in fanon. The problem I have with him in fanon is what appears to be the prevailing opinion in fanon (by most of the writers anyway, who seem to be generally categorized as teenaged girls) that Draco is really a nice guy and just misunderstood, and that somehow he and any of the "good" characters we are familiar with will become friends or something more. This is the reason I compared the death eaters to the KKK and Nazis. If you were a black (muggleborn or halfblood) girl living in Alabama and there was a white (pureblood) boy who's father was in the KKK (Death Eaters) and he constantly talked about how all black people should be wiped from the face of the earth and how much better white people are than blacks from the moment they met, do you see any hope of them being anything BUT enemies? John From leslie41 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 18:22:07 2006 From: leslie41 at yahoo.com (leslie41) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 18:22:07 -0000 Subject: Snape and the "Chosen One" Was: Nice vs. Good - Compassion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153193 > Leslie41 wrote: > > There's a difference between knowing that Harry is *considered* > > the chosen one, and actually believing it. Snape is obviously > > being sarcastic here, especially considering the context. I > > would say this is evidence Snape *doesn't* believe Harry is > > the "Chosen One," just that he knows others believe it and he > > thinks it's suspect. > > > Carol responds: > Or he could be pretending not to believe it because DE!Draco is in > theclass. (However, he's not pretending that he doesn't take > cheek, even from celebrities or heroes!) I think that his > statement to Bellatrix that Harry is a mediocre wizard is along > the same lines: he doesn't want the DEs to realize that Harry is a > real threat, or that his somewhat underdeveloped wizarding skills > have nothing to do with the threat he poses (which I think Snape > guesses has everything to do withthe powers Harry acquired at > Godric's Hollow, including Parseltongue and the scar connection, > both of which Snape knows about). Leslie41: That's a good point. Personally, I'm on the fence as to whether I agree with it. My initial instinct is to believe that Snape inherently distrusts Harry's status as the "Chosen One," and doesn't really believe Harry is as important as everyone says he is. Snape has, of course, every reason to believe Harry *is* important, but I don't think he does, because of the reasons *why* Harry is important. Harry's status as a parselmouth, and the scar, have absolutely nothing to do with what Harry has accomplished. Harry didn't really DO anything when Voldemort AK-ed him at a year old. He just sat there. Being a parselmouth as well is not something Harry has "mastered," any more than he has mastered having Lily's eyes. The view we have of Snape as an adolescent, and one that continues in our view of him as an adult, is that Snape respects hard work, insight, and accomplishment. From his view, Harry being a parselmouth or repelling Voldemort's curse are not something Harry has worked for, or that he can control. From Snape's pov, Harry doesn't discipline himself properly, and doesn't take his lessons seriously enough, so all that other stuff about him is just rot. I'm just talking Snape's pov here, and he doesn't like Harry at all, in part because Harry is being "rewarded" and given credit for something that was an accident of birth. Snape, who worked incredibly hard as a student, resents Harry from the beginning because Harry is considered "special" and has *done* nothing. Snape's attitude towards Harry's father nonwithstanding, he finds the idea that Harry is a "celebrity" at eleven positively ludicrous. And he's prejudiced, I think, against believing anything about Harry that would mark him as special in any way. From jelly92784 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 18:50:35 2006 From: jelly92784 at yahoo.com (jelly92784) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 18:50:35 -0000 Subject: The Bloody Baron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153194 Aussie wrote: The Baron was also frequenting the Astrology Tower in HBP. The same place predicted to be "Lightening struck" by Trelawney's Tarot cards and finally DDs last stand where the Death Head hovered above. The Bloody Baron, however, was there before all this. Nearly Headless Nick commented on it to Harry when he mistook Harry asking for where DD was. That made me suspect the Bloody Baron a bit more on my 2nd read. Janelle: I'm at work unfortunately and can't get my books, but I'm pretty sure that the Trio, or maybe just Harry, sees the Bloody Baron float past the door to the third floor corridor in SS, which could add to Aussie's suspicion of the Baron. Can anyone else remember times when the Baron was seen so near places that held such significance in the story? Also, what possible role could the Baron play? For example, in SS why is the Baron near this out-of-bounds area? Is he playing spy for someone, and if so, who? It could be for Dumbledore, do the ghosts in the school have to be loyal to the headmaster just like the portraits in his office? Maybe the Baron was there patrolling the area in order to keep students away. Or possibly he was spying for Quirrel/Voldemort, perhaps trying to figure out a way past Fluffy? Or, the Baron could have been spying for Snape, trying to keep tabs on Quirrel for him. I think if we can find other sightings of the Baron and see what he's been up to, we'll be able to get a better grasp on where his loyalties lie and what his potential role in the story may be if there is in fact more to him than simple window dressing. There could also be more clues as to what his true identity is. From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Wed May 31 06:38:19 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 23:38:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Possible Snape's patronus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060531063819.59299.qmail@web39111.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153195 I don't know if this has been thrown out there yet, but what if Snape's patronus is a vampire bat. We see references such as his hooked nose, the way he dresses in all black, and he seems to glide sometimes as he walks. Plus in other fictional books/movies we see the Vampire is the Werewolf's enemy. Mathias From fbiagent2thaworld at yahoo.com.au Wed May 31 07:00:25 2006 From: fbiagent2thaworld at yahoo.com.au (Lauryn) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 07:00:25 -0000 Subject: What's with all the Draco love in fanon? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153196 > On 5/30/06, John wrote: > > For some reason a lot of people like to ship Draco with Harry, Ginny, or Hermione. Maybe I'm missing something here, but Draco (in canon) is a pompous, gloating, racist nitwit (up until HBP anyway, when he finally does something without yapping about it) who has been nothing but horrible to the Trio and their friends. > > > Is there any reason besides the actor for the character being handsome (which Draco in the book WASN'T described as being). >Ali wrote: > What you've described as how you see Draco ("pompous, gloating, racist nitwit") is not necessarily different from how I, and some others, see him. However, in an adult set in his ways, those traits would be viewed, rightly so, as repulsive. However, in a child, it pulls on the heartstrings a little and makes you root for him to be redeemed, to be tossed out into the real world and learn better how to properly act. There has been arguments about how Draco is 15 yrs old and should start to know better since 17 yrs is when wizards come of age. > However, being considered an adult and being an adult are two very > different things, and in my way of thinking, Draco is still a child, > having been sheltered by his parents and raised to see the world in > only one way without having had too much to challenge those beliefs. > Hello, HBP spoilers ahead. In my opinion fandom loves Draco because he is/was a mystery, because people can relate to him (hear me out) and like Ali said, because we want to see him redeemed. Previously in the books we didn't see much about Draco apart from all the trouble he caused Harry. Although he established himself as an undesirable friend for Harry, in my opinion he did not establish himself as much else. For fanfiction writers at least, a less defined character is easier to write, because you can work with the character a bit more, before you are called out for being not true to canon. After HBP Draco still is a mystery, who would have picked the breaking nose, crying to Myrtle, protecting his family, attempted murder combination? I also think that people like him because unlike Dudley Dursley, we have a "villian" here who people can relate to. Well I can relate to him anyway. Who hasn't in their preteens said something that had negative consquences, the outcome being the opposite of what you had been intending? I certainly did. In Draco I see someone who we possibly all could have been, but for some reason or another we have been able to smooth out our rough edges, make different choices and peel back any prejudices. He hasn't achieved it yet, but he could. I could go on and on about all the different possible motivations behind all his horrible actions. At this stage we don't know if he does it because he enjoys being cruel or because he is trying to deal with things in the only way he knows how. Anyway. . .feel free to pick what I have said apart and disagree. Side note: I think one reason fans make Draco attractive because they want to show the audience that the other character's opinion of him has changed and they see something worth while in who he is. Isn't it true that once you get to know someone, they can go from plain to beautiful? But then again, I may just be overly optimistic. Thanks for reading. Lauryn aka Black Colour Vision/ Dylantian/ Sweet Mystery From mathias_forseti at yahoo.com Wed May 31 06:43:03 2006 From: mathias_forseti at yahoo.com (Mathias Forseti) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 23:43:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Horcrux theories/thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060531064303.76786.qmail@web39102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153197 Here are some of my thoughts and findings: Horcruxes | (k) == known, (p) == possible (k) Gaunt?s ring: Destroyed by DD, but not before seriously injuring him. The ring now lies in the Headmaster?s office with the Gem cracked down the middle. (k) Riddle?s Diary: Was in the possession of Lucius Malfoy, but was slipped into Ginny?s supplies. LV was ?coming back to life? by leeching off the life of Ginny; this could have been this horcruxes curse since it technically would have taken a life. It is important to remember that all splinters of LV?s soul seem to have kept his powers and abilities, ie ability to control the Basalisk. NOTE: It?s a simple thing, but notice that the Horcruxe isn?t just magically destroyed, but physically as well (fang through the journal and a cracked stone) (k) Slytherin Locket: The locket which was supposed to be in the cave, but was stolen from the unknown and infamous RAB. It just came to me, but maybe Regulus is RAB and he did destroy the locket and in turn he was killed in the process. Maybe LV knew this had happened and it was sent out that Regulus had been killed. Just a thought. (p) Hufflepuff Cup: The cup stolen by LV from Hebzibah. I can?t think of anything that leads me to type of curse or where it is located. Could Bellatrix have it? Remember she tells Snape that LV has entrusted her before with his precious possessions in the beginning of the HBP. He gave Lucius his diary horcrux so why not Bellatrix? (p) Nagini: Could Frank Bryce?s death have created the final horcrux? I mean he was close to his father?s family. Plus the snake and LV had a close connection especially at that time since it was sustaining his life. She also is a snake the ultimate symbol of the Slytherin line. (p) Harry: I very much doubt Harry is a Horcrux especially if he was an intentional one because LV tries to kill him in the books unless he doesn?t care about ?one measly part of his soul?. Plus remember the Prophecy ?Neither can live while the other survives?. Though it would be an evil twist to the story if Harry had to die to kill LV. (p) Gryffindor item: We know that LV loved Hogwarts and anything dealing with Hogwarts (ie Hufflepuff cup), but the only items I can think of for G is the Sorting Hat and his sword which are secured in Hogwarts, but we can?t rule these out since we have no proof to prove it nor disprove it. (p) Ravenclaw item: To my knowledge there are no known relics of Ravenlcaw. She was only really known for her wisdom and knowledge, but I doubt you can turn that into a Horcrux. Will Hermione figure it out? Locations: Bellatrix: See Hufflepuff Cup The Orphanage: I wonder if he has a Horcrux there since only Muggles and possibly un-educated Wizards are there. I believe that since the orphanage was a part of his life he would have left something there. Could one the mystery horcruxes be something that he ?obtained? there? It is possibly the stolen harmonica. Hogwarts: With his fixation with Hogwarts would he leave something there believing that DD would be ?foolish? enough not to look in his own ?house?. Misc: Moaning Myrtle: Even though the Basalisk technically killed her, would her death, an important death in Hogwarts history, have created the first Horcrux? Mathias From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 19:19:09 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 19:19:09 -0000 Subject: Draco in canon (Was: What's with all the Draco love in fanon?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153198 Magpie wrote: > Draco's always been a character in an interesting situation. Many > people argued long before HBP that his situation and set up meant he > had to play a part somewhere. There aren't a lot of kids in canon > that have any characterization that are in his type of situation; he > offers a lot of things for a fanfic writer to explore. Fanon can do > different things with a character so that people can keep things they like, lose things they don't like, shade things one way or another. I mean, the funny thing about all the "why would people write about him?" is that of course ultimately the author was one of them. > Iow, many Draco fanfic authors were interested in the same things > about the character that seem to interest the author. Carol responds: Rather than looking at Draco in terms of fan reaction, it might be profitable to consider him in literary terms. The whole Draco subplot in HBP puts Harry in the role of eavesdropper, ironically analogous to the young Severus Snape in a number of ways that aren't relevant here since we're talking about Draco as a character rather than a plot device. There's also a Harry/Dumbledore Draco/Snape parallel, which may be further developed in Book 7. I'm interested in what you mean by Draco's "situation," which I take to be analogous in some ways to Dudley Dursley's (an only son whose mother smothers and overindulges him) and in other ways to Ron's (both are purebloods but one has been taught to believe and the other to reject the doctrine of pureblood superiority). So one way to look at Draco would be as a foil (or "mirror") to Ron, or perhaps to the young Sirius Black, who grew up in a family of Dark wizards with Slytherin values (snake symbols all over the house) and yet rejected both pureblood superiority and Voldemort. Or maybe he's a foil to Regulus, who followed a similar path and ended up rejecting Voldemort. It's too soon to say whether he'll do the same and whether, unlike Regulus, he'll survive. But in some ways, Draco's "situation" is unique among the more developed minor characters because his father is a Death Eater (as is his aunt) and his mother is, at the least, a Voldemort loyalist. The only character (aside from the thuggish Crabbe and Goyle) whose situation is similar is Theodore Nott, and we have yet to see enough of Theo to know where the arrest of his own DE father, and the knowledge of Draco's post-HBP plight, will lead him. Another way to look at Draco is in terms of his role as (minor) antagonist. IMO, in the first five books, he's as much Ron's antagonist as Harry's, perhaps because he regards Ron as a "blood traitor" who ought (in his view) to share his values. Following his father's example, he turns up his nose at Dumbledore, calling him a "Mudblood lover," and tries to undermine the "oaf" Hagrid, known to be a Dumbledore supporter. None of this behavior is of any more consequence to Draco himself, IMO, than his schoolyard bullying or the Gryffindor/Slytherin Quidditch rivalry. He's merely following in the steps of his idolized father, consciously or unconsciously helping him undermine Dumbledore via Hagrid and hoping that the Heir of Slytherin will wipe out the "Mudbloods." None of this is the result of thinking things through; he's merely accepting without question what his parents, and particularly his DE father, have taught him. And considering that three of the four boys who share a dorm room with him (Crabbe, Goyle, and Nott) are also sons of DEs and the fourth, Blaise Zabini, is a pureblood supremacist, he's unlikely to question Malfoy family values. At the end of OoP, his antagonism focuses briefly and intensely on Harry, whom Draco holds responsible for his father's arrest. (I believe, though I can't prove it, that he went to Voldemort himself, intent on revenge but also full of his brilliant little plan to let DEs into Hogwarts without getting his own hands dirty.) But once he receives his mission from the Dark Lord, he becomes a seemingly ineffectual antagonist to Dumbledore (and an unwitting agent of Snape's tragic dilemma). And now he's an outcast and an outlaw, with little choice but to become a DE in earnest (or pretend to be one, under Snape's guidance and protection), or turn to his enemies and ask them to hide him. To me, the last seems least likely. Will Draco be redeemed? Will he die? Will he fall irretrievably into evil? Whose antagonist, if any, will he be in Book 7. I think that he'll follow the path foreshadowed by Regulus, somehow helping Harry and then dying as a "traitor" to the DEs. But if he remains a DE, I think that he'll be Ron's antagonist, not Harry's, as Bellatrix will be Neville's. Harry will confront Snape but (I optimistically predict) neither will die, and then Harry will destroy Voldemort alone. He has enough on his plate without dealing with Draco, who (unlike Snape) is insufficiently important to sidetrack him from the Horcrux hunt and the ultimate showdown. Carol, picturing Dudley and Draco in hiding together and unable to suppress a smile From blink_883 at hotmail.com Wed May 31 15:31:09 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:31:09 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153199 Brothergib replies: > Also, Snape is doing this for his own selfish reasons. I'm sure that the fact that Harry is intricately involved in Voldemort's eventual downfall annoys Snape incredibly. Snape will do his thing behind the scenes, and his true colours won't be revealed until the end. There is also a very good chance that if Snape destroys all the Horcruxes (or at least knows they are all gone) that he will attempt to destroy Voldemort himself! < WG*: Was rereading HBP's first chapter. In some ways, whether we believe Snape to be good or evil, or on Harry's side or LV's, pretty much hinges on what we believe of Snape's /conversation/ with Bella. (btw- mongoose (mongeese?) eat rats too...*points to Pettigrew behind bookshelf and Snape's comments to him about finding him something more dangerous to do..*) Anyway, about Snape doing *whatever* he's doing for selfish reasons. Atm, I pretty much agree with that. However, I realised rereading this conversation that maybe Snape is frustrated with or at Harry for something that i've not seen mentioned here yet... Snape says something along the lines of "we thought Harry might be the next dark lord, someone to rally round once more, but when he arrived I saw he was completely unremarkable". It seems that Snape had, much like the whole of WW might if they knew it was 'up to Harry', pinned all his hopes on the defeat of LV on Harry. The difference being, Snape says he thought LV was dead at that point. SO, is Snape bitter towards Harry because he isn't inherrently evil _or_ amazingly powerful (latter would lead us to believe he's DDM) ? WG* From tareprachi at yahoo.com Wed May 31 12:37:04 2006 From: tareprachi at yahoo.com (pforparvati) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 12:37:04 -0000 Subject: Question about Horcrux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153200 "honeykissed246" wrote: > Second, remember even Dumbledore said that one person alone could > not have retrieved the locket and he was grateful that Harry had > accompanied him. Now if that is true, did someone accompany R.A.B. > into the cave to get the orginal horcrux? I know a lot of people > are saying that R.A.B. might be Sirius's brother, Regulus Black who > was killed by Voldemort personally. PP now: Regulas was not kill by Voldemort. In GOF, Sirius told Harry that Regulas was not that important to kill by LV himself. Though the reasoning Sirius gave doesn't sound very much sure, but still Sirus would have known if RB was killed by LV. PP, just adding a knut here From mi_nai_leeloo at yahoo.com Wed May 31 17:11:16 2006 From: mi_nai_leeloo at yahoo.com (Leeloo Volusia) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 10:11:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What's with all the Draco love in fanon? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060531171116.25539.qmail@web38502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153201 sistermagpie wrote: Magpie before: No, it's not the actor. It was around before the movies and even since then I don't think the actor is so important in himself. I'd say the reasons for it are as numerous as the number of people who like the character. There are probably some "I want to change him" people in there, but there's no reason fans of one character should be reduced to dismissive stereotypes more than any other. Leeloo now: I suppose I am one of those Draco fangirls. But the character absolutely fascinates me. And as for Tom Felton... I'm a Felton Fangirl too, but for different reasons than I like Draco. I think Felton as an actor nails the portrayal of Malfoy so perfectly that some people have a hard time distinguishing between who is Tom and who is Draco. Draco's always been a character in an interesting situation. Many people argued long before HBP that his situation and set up meant he had to play a part somewhere. Leeloo now: This I totally agree with. No author puts that much effort into a character to have him not play a major role in the outcome of the story. Draco is a fascinating character from his excessive idolization of his father, the obvious fear of disappointing his father, the spoiled baby that is coddled by his mother, to the young man he is forced to become in HBP that can barely handle what has been asked of him. But, ultimately he succeeded, in what I view was all that was realistically expected of him, in getting the DE into Hogwarts. As for killing Dumbledore, even JKR said that Draco was not a murderer. There aren't a lot of kids in canon that have any characterization that are in his type of situation; he offers a lot of things for a fanfic writer to explore. Fanon can do different things with a character so that people can keep things they like, lose things they don't like, shade things one way or another. I mean, the funny thing about all the "why would people write about him?" is that of course ultimately the author was one of them. He's not the hero of a fanfic story or anything like that, but her story definitely echoed plenty of Draco fics (though given fanon's obsession with romance, in fanfic it was more often played out via shipping). Iow, many Draco fanfic authors were interested in the same things about the character that seem to interest the author. Leeloo now: I think that is the point of fan-fiction. It allows us to keep the characters as we want to see them, bring them back to life, alter their canon universe, and explore the sides of the character that we may not get to see in canon. I speak as a writer of fan-fiction and a person who role plays Malfoy's character in RPG. This character is beautifully designed for a fan-fic writer because he could go any number of ways. He is a multi-dimensional character (dare I say nearly as much as Snape) and he is at a very dangerous crossroads in his life. He is quite obviously scared out of his mind without his father's guidance, he's just failed half his mission given to him by the Dark Lord himself, and he was unable to kill Dumbledore. Tack on the brutal attack by Harry with sectumsempra AND the fact he was caught crying in a bathroom talking to Moaning Myrtle (which in and of itself is enough to send someone over the edge), what's not to like for a fan-fic author? It's a perfect set up. Draco could be pure evil and end up worse than his father. He could be redeemed with the help of "good" Snape when Voldemort is finally vanquished. Or he could fall in love and change his ways. The possibilities are infinite. He's a beautifully fascinating character and I, for one, completely understand why. Just my two cents... ~ Leeloo From blink_883 at hotmail.com Wed May 31 15:15:56 2006 From: blink_883 at hotmail.com (whirledgirl) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:15:56 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153202 "whirledgirl" wrote: >> Has Snape even got a memory happy enough to create a patronus? Enough love, which seems to be the type of memory patronuses (patroni?) 'respond' to more? << Lolita: > Yes, he can cast a patronus. WG*: Sorry, I can see how you figured out Snape has the ability to cast a patronus, and I should have picked that up too. Also, if occlumency *is* a viable alternative against dementors, it also makes sense that ''Aunt Bellatrix'' taught it (occlumency) to Draco if she'd been using it in Azkaban too. Lolita: > Besides, I do not think that Snape was a 'poor, unloved little thing'. He may not be the most content person there is, but I don't believe he is such an unhappy soul as fans so often want him to be. We do have a canon fact that at least DD thought well enough of and probably cared about him. And so do the Malfoys, it seems. < WG*: Personally, I don't *want* Snape to be an unhappy soul in particular. It is however possibly a result of his unhappy childhood, at least the parts he puts in the pensieve when 'teaching' Harry occlumency, that he may not be able to cast a patronus in the presence of dementors. Just like the dementors at first overwhelmed Harry. Also, this ties into the whole Lupin vs. Snape as 'good' or not, because here we have two episodes where Lupin and Snape both taught Harry how to defend himself. But that's for another post, lol. Thanks, WG* From clare.pilotconsult at btinternet.com Wed May 31 18:58:17 2006 From: clare.pilotconsult at btinternet.com (clare6122) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 18:58:17 -0000 Subject: Horcrux hunting In-Reply-To: <1789c2360605311043v7dc31f4ei401614d1e42e13ed@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153203 > Peggy W: > I would only add that we don't actually know that it was just the > poison Basilisk fang that destroyed the diary/Horcrux. The fang > was covered with Harry's own blood (IIRC he removed it from his > arm), so for all we know, it may have been Harry's blood that > destroyed the Horcrux. I have wondered about this for some time. Clare: I have just signed up so hope I'm not raising a question that has already been aired - but as DD says that a Horcrux can be concealed in a living creature, do you think that Harry himself could be a hiding place, and that explains many of the phenomena he has experienced? I have often pondered on the wording of the prophecy "neither can live while the other survives" - which implies to me that they both have to die - can't wait for the next book to settle the question once and for all. Thanks, Clare From bawilson at citynet.net Wed May 31 18:57:26 2006 From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 14:57:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Unforgivable? Message-ID: <7308.129.71.218.25.1149101846.squirrel@citymail.citynet.net> No: HPFGUIDX 153204 houyhnhnm: > The other is when Harry uses a Dark and potentially fatal curse on > a fellow student. Alla: >> Um, THAT is an incident that truly deserves investigation, because Harry used an Unforgivable. I mean, I am pretty confident that very good case for self-defense can be made, but Unforgivable had been used and the letter of the law demands investigation, IMO. << BAW: Erm, when did Harry use an Unforgivable in that scuffle? As nasty as 'sectumsempra' is, it isn't an Unforgivable. Now, DRACO *tried* to use the Cruciatus curse on Harry, but we don't know if *attempted* use of an Unforgivable is a crime. BAW From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 19:48:33 2006 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 19:48:33 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable? In-Reply-To: <7308.129.71.218.25.1149101846.squirrel@citymail.citynet.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153205 > houyhnhnm: > > The other is when Harry uses a Dark and potentially fatal curse on > > a fellow student. > > Alla: > >> Um, THAT is an incident that truly deserves investigation, because > Harry used an Unforgivable. I mean, I am pretty confident that very > good case for self-defense can be made, but Unforgivable had been > used and the letter of the law demands investigation, IMO. << > > > BAW: > Erm, when did Harry use an Unforgivable in that scuffle? As nasty > as 'sectumsempra' is, it isn't an Unforgivable. Now, DRACO *tried* > to use the Cruciatus curse on Harry, but we don't know if *attempted* > use of an Unforgivable is a crime. > Alla: Hehe. Yes of course, not sure what cloud came upon my brain when I wrote this. Hate to waste a post on it, but you are right of course. Still, I stand by the point that Snape was in no position to puch for anything most likely here, since Draco would have been investigated too. Alla, ironing her fingers now. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 19:53:04 2006 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 19:53:04 -0000 Subject: Nice vs. Good, honesty, and Snape: Was Snape, Apologies, and Redemption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153206 Irene wrote: > Now, I'm going out on a limb here, but the fact that this was not reciprocated suggests strongly to me that it was uninvited. Lupin has no business to be on the first name basis with Snape. > > Lanval: > Of course he does. They're contemporaries; they were at school > together. Whether Snape likes it or not is another thing. > As for the notion that he calls Snape 'Severus' merely to annoy him, > well, canon would refute that: he still calls him 'Severus' with > Snape's wand pointed at him, in the Shrieking Shack. And whatever > Lupin may be, stupid he's not. > > Also: are you saying that Snape is showing Lupin more respect than > vice versa? Because I sincerely doubt that. He calls him 'Lupin' to > his face, when they're *alone* (Harry of course having to be about, > for narrative reasons). No title. Same way he snarls 'Potter', > or 'Longbottom'. > > Even in front of the class, Snape slips once and simply refers to > him as 'Lupin'. > > Lupin, on the other hand always reminds Harry & friends that > it's 'Professor Snape'. Irene: > > > If one of my schooldays' tormentors appeared at my work place and started behaving as if we were the best of chums, I'm not sure I'd be able to keep my cool even to the level Snape does in PoA. > > > > Lanval: > Guess we're different then. I'd simply assume, until further notice, > that this person had decided to move on, stopped being childish, and > was making an effort to be pleasant. Carol responds: I'm not absolutely sure about Lupin's having a genuine desire to move on, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt here. For the same reason, I have no reason to doubt the sincerity of his statement iin HBP that he "neither likes nor dislikes Severus." I believe, too, that he's genuinely grateful to Snape for the perfect Wolfsbane Potions that made his transformations bearable for nine months, and which he certainly misses in his present condition. It's interesting that he persists in calling Snape by his first name even in his absence, just as he calls Black by his. They are contemporaries and the use of first names seems to indicate that he views them as equals. Certainly "Severus," whatever his motivation for using it, is an improvement over "Snivellus." (Black, at least, has *not* decided to stop being childish and move on.) As for Snape, the only persons I can recall him addressing respectfully are Dumbledore (usually called "Headmaster," IIRC), McGonagall (addressed as "Professor McGonagall"), and Fudge (in PoA, before Fudge turns against Dumbledore, as "Minister"). Snape rarely uses first names, and his reasons for doing so appear to vary. The only instances I can think of are Igor (Karkaroff), Draco, Narcissa, Bellatrix, and Tonks. It would be out of character for Snape to address Lupin by his first name, as Lupin addresses him--especially in PoA, given that Snape thinks Lupin is helping a murderer get into Hogwarts to kill Harry. Carol, who sees Lupin and Snape as fellow victims of the DADA curse and clings to a faint hope that they'll come to see each other in the same light From belviso at attglobal.net Wed May 31 20:15:37 2006 From: belviso at attglobal.net (sistermagpie) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 20:15:37 -0000 Subject: Draco in canon (Was: What's with all the Draco love in fanon?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153207 > Carol responds: But in some ways, Draco's "situation" is unique among > the more developed minor characters because his father is a Death > Eater (as is his aunt) and his mother is, at the least, a Voldemort > loyalist. The only character (aside from the thuggish Crabbe and > Goyle) whose situation is similar is Theodore Nott, and we have yet to > see enough of Theo to know where the arrest of his own DE father, and > the knowledge of Draco's post-HBP plight, will lead him. Magpie: That's more what I meant, I think (and that was a very good idea looking at his role). Even in OotP, which many people saw as the beginning of Draco's gradual disappearance, I thought he'd been tied more tightly to the plot, not less, when we learned of his connections to the Blacks, his father was arrested, we got more reminders of his personal connection to Snape. I feel Rowling would want to use all those things in using the character (and has already used some to great effect). At a time when Draco himself was just kind of in a holding pattern his position in the story seemed full of possibility as the one kid that we really knew (as you say, Theo was kind of an unknown) who was brought up to be part of the other side. It doesn't seem strange to me that fanfic writers are drawn to that even in a Romeo & Juliet kind of way. Carol: None of this is the result of thinking > things through; he's merely accepting without question what his > parents, and particularly his DE father, have taught him. And > considering that three of the four boys who share a dorm room with him > (Crabbe, Goyle, and Nott) are also sons of DEs and the fourth, Blaise > Zabini, is a pureblood supremacist, he's unlikely to question Malfoy > family values. Magpie: I agree--and at the same time he also offers the tantalizing possibility of this whole gothic Pureblood world that I imagine is just fun for people to play in with the money and the funny names and the blood feuds and the traditions and the secrets of Slytherin house. It's sometimes interesting when authors play up the similarities between Ron and Draco, that in some ways their rivalry contains things Harry doesn't quite understand because of their similar backgrounds. Carol: But once he > receives his mission from the Dark Lord, he becomes a seemingly > ineffectual antagonist to Dumbledore (and an unwitting agent of > Snape's tragic dilemma). And now he's an outcast and an outlaw, with > little choice but to become a DE in earnest (or pretend to be one, > under Snape's guidance and protection), or turn to his enemies and ask > them to hide him. To me, the last seems least likely. Magpie: And this, no matter what way it turns out, just offers a lot of possibity. It's essentially a coming-of-age story that's wildly different from Harry's--almost a sort of Dark Path where instead of Draco growing and learning like Harry does, he must grow through losing things. HBP, as you said, put Harry in the eavesdropper position and so we were only seeing glimpses of things, but I think JKR made sure to show that everything that had defined Draco in the past was somehow being challenged: he challenged Snape, his name was blatantly a disadvantage, his father was in prison, he felt his mother was in danger, Voldemort was after him, not someone else, the DEs were yet another threat, killing was hard, etc. I remember way back pre-OotP I said to someone that I thought Draco was the kid besides Harry who had the most to fear from Voldemort being back and this is a lot of what I meant. His definitely something that offers a lot of possibility for drama. Regulus then goes an adds even more possibilities. I do think that Draco's role is not as Harry's antagonist--frankly, he was never very good at that even before HBP (and Harry's got Voldemort and more importantly Snape). It's kind of interesting to me, actually, the way JKR sometimes lets him mirror (using the term loosely because he's not really a total mirror to any of them) the Trio--he's got to do double and triple duty, maybe, as the Slytherin student we know. John: > I don't have a problem with him being in fanon. The problem I have > with him in fanon is what appears to be the prevailing opinion in > fanon (by most of the writers anyway, who seem to be generally > categorized as teenaged girls) that Draco is really a nice guy and > just misunderstood, and that somehow he and any of the "good" > characters we are familiar with will become friends or something more. Magpie: Hmmm...well, first I guess I'd say we have to remember that what people write is not necessarily what they think is true. Part of fic is about making things different. But if we assume that some people writing Draco as misunderstood and nice do see that in him I'd say it's partially due to the hurt/comfort factor that's very present in the character and the same kind of wishful thinking or character warping you see with a lot of characters. Liking characters is an odd thing; you sometimes just get things out of them that might not be immediately apparent to a casual reader but that show up in the fanon versions. Draco is, I think, a character who lends himself to projected feelings of being hopeless, rejected or ignored. There's something in the character that lends itself to Emo. Writers can crank up the hurt and get on with the comfort. Many may have little interest in understanding his bigotry so just get rid of it by saying it wasn't really true or whatever. Also he's a character who, as I said above, comes with an intriguing world of wealth and tradition so people may want to keep that and just turn him into a prince. With the right changes here and there Draco can easily become a very different character, so that's what happens to him. Even before that your way of seeing him may be very different from the way someone else understands him. The fact that he's never going to marry Hermione in canon has no meaning in fanon, but people can't control which pairings they prefer. But if you're interested in redeeming a character romance has a long history of being used that way, even if it's often done badly. -m From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Wed May 31 21:06:38 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:06:38 EDT Subject: What's with all the Draco love in fanon? Message-ID: <43d.296aae3.31af5f5e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153208 John: For some reason a lot of people like to ship Draco with Harry, Ginny, or Hermione. Maybe I'm missing something here, but Draco (in canon) is a pompous, gloating, racist nitwit... Clare: Redemption perhaps? Throughout the ages people have been fascinated by the idea of redeeming the bad guy - when there is a mystery to them. We do not get to know much about Draco. There is no canon to illustrate Draco as a complex character. Therefore he retains his mystery and is open for redemption. This has been discussed on forums as well as explored in fanfiction and JKRs temporary reprieve for him in the shape of Snape plays to that theme, we seem to be supposed to wonder whether he will be saved. Who someone wants to pair him with in a romantic fanfiction is about the tastes and predilections of the author but I believe the above to be the impetus. John: The comparison I make for the Death Eaters and Draco and Voldemort in particular are Nazis (particulary fitting since Hitler was part Jew) or the KKK and their prejudice towards blacks. If I was black (Hermione), half black (Harry), or friends with somebody who is black why would I date somebody who thinks the world would be a better place without black people around? Clare: I don't think the fics contain a Draco who still holds such beliefs, the point is that he has learnt his lesson or never truly felt that way in the first place. As to the Nazis, we use that term generically for all forms of fascism and I am not sure that it is applicable here. Voldemort and the Death Eaters are not "the institution", they are a rogue group working against the status quo. This is completely different to Hitler, who had control of the government and intistuted martial law in order to be able to do whatever he liked. The situation is markedly different. In addition JKR has already aligned Grindlewald with Hitler by making the muggle WW2 and the Grindlewald war one and the same. This illustrates the difference and implies that Voldemort is supposed to represent a more modern form of fascism - perhaps akin to our BNP or to the IRA, who got England used to terrorism long before the rest of the world starting wetting themselves about the grammatically incorrect term "terror". John: Is there any reason besides the actor for the character being handsome (which Draco in the book WASN'T described as being). Is it simply one of those "I can change him" situations that seems to happen with lots of girls/women? Would replacing "mudblood" with "n****r", "death eater" with nazi and "pure blood" with "aryan" in the books yield the same amount of pro-Draco stories? Clare: The poor boy who plays Draco can't get a girlfriend because of the character he plays, so I don't think perceptions of handsomeness make much difference. Of course it is an "I can change him" scenario, you've answered your own question. It isn't just women though; why do you think they made so many Film Noirs? Why is the wayward woman often the focus of comics/graphic novels, dark romances and gothic novels? Why is Mina Harker sexy? Who doesn't want to save her? Salvation, redemption, "I can change this" - it's the whole point of personal fantasy. It's the same impetus that has a normally sensible adult jumping around on furniture pretending to be a pirate having watched Johnny Depp in a rather swanky battle scene. We want to be involved in the thing that has fired our imaginations and changing it to suit our own personal tastes and desires is the most natural first step towards "ownership" (I hate the term but it is appropriate). You might not agree with the choice but I am sure that you have perpetrated similar literary sabotage within your own mind. Would changing the words alter the number of redemption fantasies? Not a jot! Oswald Moseley had women swooning all over the place, including some of our most celebrated and intelligent women writers and he was openly a genuine Nazi. Gotta save the bad guy - everyone knows that all he needs is a good woman/gay guy... lol. Smiles, Clare xx [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rdoliver30 at yahoo.com Wed May 31 20:40:32 2006 From: rdoliver30 at yahoo.com (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 20:40:32 -0000 Subject: Terminal Stupidity of Snapey-Poo (was Re: Nice vs. Good - Compassion)b In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 153209 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" wrote: > And, Lupinlore, a word to the wise: Better take a different tack, > than calling Snape "terminally stupid." That's never going to get > you *anywhere*. > Depends on where you're trying to get, I suppose. If you mean it won't change anyone's mind, that is definitely true, but this just isn't a place where anyone ever changes their mind, particularly about the three main characters (Snapey-poo, Dumbledore, or Harry). Or, to be more exact, people VERY rarely change their minds on those characters, so rarely that it amounts to a fluctuation somewhere on the order of the initial creation of the universe. Now, if you mean we aren't getting anywhere with regard to statements about Snapey-poo, I don't think that's true. No one on this list is going to compromise with anyone else when it comes to fundamental viewpoints, but there are ways in which fundamental viewpoints become clearer. IMO, for instance, anyone who acts the way Snapey-poo does throughout the books (i.e. anyone who acts that way to those people in those situations) pretty much needs to have their picture put in a phrasebook somewhere beside the words "terminally stupid." Indeed, we are dealing with multiple layers of meaning, here, including, I think, not only "too stupid to live" but "guaranteeing one's own demise through the creative application of stupidity." Both, I think, fit Snapey-poo nicely. It is interesting the degree to which all other threads wither. Even I, radical that I am, have tried a half-dozen times to start non-Snape/non-DD threads over the last few months. All of them were stillborn or died within a couple of rounds. Meanwhile, Snape and/or DD threads flourish - despite the fact that anyone who has been around for a while knows exactly where they are going to go. There is a dissertation in social psychology in that for some graduate student who is interested in such things. Lupinlore From ClareWashbrook at aol.com Wed May 31 21:39:12 2006 From: ClareWashbrook at aol.com (ClareWashbrook at aol.com) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:39:12 EDT Subject: Question about Horcrux? Message-ID: <478.24042ac.31af6700@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 153210 honeykissed246 at yahoo.com writes: > Could this be one of the reasons Dumbledore trusts Snape? No. That's fuzzy logic. If Dumbledore trusted Snape because he had gone into the cave with Regulus Black to retrieve the horcrux then they would already have the horcrux, they would not have just found out about it and there would be no need to go through it all again. If Snape had gone but Black had hidden the locket and Snape knew where it was, then again there would be no need to go because they would be heading for the hiding place instead. If no-one knew where it was then there would still be no point in going because the one thing that they would have known was that it wasn't *there*. What I would ask is why was it not destroyed at the time and what does the fact that it wasn't imply? Personally I think it implies that RAB wasn't all that commited to the Light; one would only keep something like that if one intended to use it as a bargaining tool. smiles, Clare xx