Hagrid and Dumbledore: was Hags and "hag-rid"

[Kemper]

No: HPFGUIDX 152550

On 5/18/06, justcarol67 <justcarol67 at yahoo.com > 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]