What happens after death - Portraits

[rlace2003]

No: HPFGUIDX 167253

> bboyminn:
>
> While JKR hasn't spelled it out in detail, she clearly
> makes a distinction between 'portraits' and 'HEADMASTER
> Portraits'. Headmaster's leave a faint imprint of them
> selves at Hogwarts. That 'faint imprint' gives them a
> level of realization that is not found in the typical
> portraits. You will notice that all the seeming
> sentient portraits have indeed been Headmaster portraits.
> All the seeming non-sentient, like Mrs. Black, have NOT
> been Headmaster portraits.
>
> Again, JKR hasn't really made this distinction clear, but
> I think given what we see in the books and what she has
> said in interviews, it can reasonably be deduced.
> <SNIP>

Ryan:

Has JKR stated that she makes a distinction?

I agree that there does seem to be a distinction between Headmaster
portraits and the others, but that distinction doesn't seem to be
absolute.  Several of the other portraits seem to possess, at least,
a limited sentience.  The Pink Lady, Violet, and Sir Cadogan come to
mind.  Also, Mrs. Black's portrait sounds insane and senile to me.
That may, in fact, have been what she was like when the portrait was
commisioned.

It's possible that there's a difference between portraits of real
people and those of imaginary people.  There's also the question of
varying skill on the part of the wizards who created the portraits.
And, there are probably different methods for creating different
kinds of portraits.

Maybe the portraits aren't that important, overall, but I don't
think JKR thought them over enough when she wrote them into the
story.  I think Philip K. Dick would've had a blast with them.

Ryan, who wonders if--since the Headmaster's office has portraits of
past headmasters--the offices of the heads of house have portraits
of their predecessors.